<?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/2019/07/06/director-independence-and-oversight-obligation-in-marchand-v-barnhill/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>Thu, 09 Apr 2026 11:32:53 +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>Director Independence and Oversight Obligation in Marchand v. Barnhill</title>
		<link>https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2019/07/06/director-independence-and-oversight-obligation-in-marchand-v-barnhill/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=director-independence-and-oversight-obligation-in-marchand-v-barnhill</link>
		<comments>https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2019/07/06/director-independence-and-oversight-obligation-in-marchand-v-barnhill/#respond</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 06 Jul 2019 13:58:42 +0000</pubDate>
<!-- 		<dc:creator><![CDATA[]]></dc:creator> -->
				<category><![CDATA[Boards of Directors]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Court Cases]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Practitioner Publications]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Board oversight]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Caremark]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Delaware cases]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Delaware law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Derivative suits]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Duty of loyalty]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Oversight]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Shareholder suits]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/?p=119890?d=20190706095842EDT</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On June 18, 2019, in Marchand v. Barnhill, the Delaware Supreme Court, in an opinion written by Chief Justice Leo E. Strine, Jr. on behalf of a unanimous court, issued a decision reversing the Court of Chancery’s dismissal of a stockholder derivative suit alleging Caremark claims —that the board failed to provide adequate oversight of a key risk [&#8230;]]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<hgroup><em>Posted by Peter Atkins and Paul Lockwood, Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP, on Saturday, July 6, 2019 </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="https://www.skadden.com/professionals/a/atkins-peter-a" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">Peter Atkins</a> and <a href="https://www.skadden.com/professionals/l/lockwood-paul-j" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">Paul Lockwood</a> are partners at Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher &amp; Flom LLP. This post is based on their Skadden memorandum and <span class="paragraph">is part of the <a href="https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/the-delaware-law-series/">Delaware law series</a>; links to other posts in the series are available <a href="https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/the-delaware-law-series/">here</a>.</span></p>
</div></hgroup><p>On June 18, 2019, in <em>Marchand v. Barnhill</em>, the Delaware Supreme Court, in an opinion written by Chief Justice Leo E. Strine, Jr. on behalf of a unanimous court, issued a decision reversing the Court of Chancery’s dismissal of a stockholder derivative suit alleging <em>Caremark </em>claims <a class="footnote" id="1b" href="https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2019/07/06/director-independence-and-oversight-obligation-in-marchand-v-barnhill/#1">[1]</a>—that the board failed to provide adequate oversight of a key risk area and thus breached its duty of loyalty. The case arose out of a listeria outbreak in ice cream made by Blue Bell Creameries USA Inc. that sickened many consumers, caused three deaths and resulted in a total product recall.</p>
<h2>Key Determinations</h2>
<p>The key Delaware Supreme Court determinations, both fact-driven, were:</p>
<ul>
<li><strong>Independence.</strong> The Supreme Court held that one director, viewed by the Court of Chancery as independent, was not independent based on the allegations in the complaint. As a result, the court found that a majority of the board was not independent and disinterested for purposes of the board’s consideration of a stockholder demand to file a lawsuit against directors and officers.</li>
<li><strong>Oversight. </strong>For purposes of denying a motion to dismiss by the company, the facts alleged by the plaintiffs were sufficient to satisfy the high <em>Caremark </em>standard for establishing that a board breached its duty of loyalty by failing to make a good faith effort to oversee a material risk area, thus demonstrating bad faith.</li>
</ul>
<p> <a href="https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2019/07/06/director-independence-and-oversight-obligation-in-marchand-v-barnhill/#more-119890" class="more-link"><span aria-label="Continue reading Director Independence and Oversight Obligation in Marchand v. Barnhill">(more&hellip;)</span></a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2019/07/06/director-independence-and-oversight-obligation-in-marchand-v-barnhill/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
