Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

Err...I am guessing you have never been involved shareholder derivative lawsuit against the board then...happens all the time in M&A.

http://www.pennstatelawreview.org/116/3/116%20Penn%20St.%20L...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revlon,_Inc._v._MacAndrews_%26....




That's a specialized edge-case and both of your links make the same point that I was making as the default rule for normal operations. There is usually considerable deference to business judgement but when a company is being sold you have an unusually simple situation where the timeframe is fixed and the value is precise. Notice how the situation is recognized as different from the normal operations we were talking about:

> Accordingly, the board's actions are evaluated in a different frame of reference. In such a context, that conduct can not be judicially reviewed pursuant to the traditional business judgment rule, but instead will be scrutinized for reasonableness in relation to this discrete obligation.


Best not to talk in absolutes then, Mr. "'There's no legal concept of that oft-asserted "fiduciary duty to maximize shareholder profits'"

lol at M&A is a "specialized edge-case".




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: