<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>The Harvard Law School Forum on Corporate Governance</title>
	<atom:link href="https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2017/05/10/guarding-against-challenges-to-director-equity-compensation/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu</link>
	<description>The leading online blog in the fields of corporate governance and financial regulation.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 05 May 2026 11:32:08 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.5.8</generator>

 
	<item>
		<title>Guarding Against Challenges to Director Equity Compensation</title>
		<link>https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2017/05/10/guarding-against-challenges-to-director-equity-compensation/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=guarding-against-challenges-to-director-equity-compensation</link>
		<comments>https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2017/05/10/guarding-against-challenges-to-director-equity-compensation/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 10 May 2017 13:36:51 +0000</pubDate>
<!-- 		<dc:creator><![CDATA[]]></dc:creator> -->
				<category><![CDATA[Boards of Directors]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Corporate Elections & Voting]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Court Cases]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Practitioner Publications]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Agency costs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Business judgment rule]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Delaware cases]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Delaware law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Director compensation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Director liability]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fiduciary duties]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Say on pay]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Securities litigation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Shareholder suits]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Shareholder voting]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/?p=87682?d=20170510093651EDT</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[There has been an emerging litigation trend in Delaware, where most U.S. public companies are incorporated, alleging that directors breached their fiduciary duties and committed waste of corporate assets in granting themselves excessive awards under the company’s equity compensation plan. Because directors have a direct interest in their own pay, Delaware courts have held that [&#8230;]]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<hgroup><em>Posted by P. Rupert Russell and Jiang Bian, Shartsis Friese LLP, on Wednesday, May 10, 2017 </em><div class='e_n' style='background:#F8F8F8;padding:10px;margin-top:5px;margin-bottom:10px;text-indent:2.5em;'><strong style='margin-left:-2.5em;'>Editor's Note: </strong> <p style="margin:0; display:inline;"><a href="http://www.sflaw.com/attorney/p-rupert-russell/">P. Rupert Russell</a> is a partner and <a href="http://www.sflaw.com/attorney/jiang-bian/">Jiang Bian</a> is an associate at Shartsis Friese LLP. This post is based on a Shartsis Friese publication by Mr. Russell and Mr. Bian.</p>
</div></hgroup><p>There has been an emerging litigation trend in Delaware, where most U.S. public companies are incorporated, alleging that directors breached their fiduciary duties and committed waste of corporate assets in granting themselves excessive awards under the company’s equity compensation plan. <a class="footnote" id="1b" href="https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2017/05/10/guarding-against-challenges-to-director-equity-compensation/#1">[1]</a> Because directors have a direct interest in their own pay, Delaware courts have held that board decisions on director compensation do not receive the protection of the business judgment rule without proper stockholder ratification.</p>
<p>When dealing with stockholder lawsuits, the often crucial issue faced by many public companies is whether they can avoid discovery. If a stockholder lawsuit can survive a motion to dismiss, the nuisance nature of discovery may significantly increase the case’s settlement value, regardless of whether the plaintiff can eventually prevail. Absent the protection of the business judgment rule, it could be difficult to dismiss stockholder complaints at the pleadings stage, and the corporate defendants may face an unpleasant choice between continued litigation with all of its risks and distractions or a costly settlement.</p>
<p> <a href="https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2017/05/10/guarding-against-challenges-to-director-equity-compensation/#more-87682" class="more-link"><span aria-label="Continue reading Guarding Against Challenges to Director Equity Compensation">(more&hellip;)</span></a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2017/05/10/guarding-against-challenges-to-director-equity-compensation/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
