February 1, 2023

Volume XIII, Number 32

Advertisement

January 31, 2023

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis

January 30, 2023

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis
Advertisement

Nevada Supreme Court Affirms Choice Of New York Over Delaware

Five years ago, I noted that the Nevada Supreme Court had adopted New York's more deferential approach for assessing special litigation qualifications in Auerbach v. Bennett, 393 N.E.2d 994 (N.Y. 1979) over that of the Delaware Supreme Court in Zapata Corp. v. Maldonado, 430 A.2d 779 (Del. 1981). In re DISH Network Derivative Litigation, 133 Nev. 438, 442-43, 401 P.3d 1081, 1087-88 (2017).  Under Auerbach,  a shareholder is not be permitted to proceed with derivative litigation after an special litigation committee requests dismissal, unless and until the district court determines at an evidentiary hearing that the committee lacked independence or failed to conduct a thorough investigation in good faith.

In an unpublished order of affirmance issued this summer, the Nevada Supreme Court addressed the evidentiary standard to be applied to the trial court's determination.  Plumbers Loc. Union No. 519 Pension Tr. Fund v. Ergen, 514 P.3d 440 (Table), 2022 WL 3150988.  The Court found that the trial court had correctly applied a preponderance of the evidence standard to its determination that a special litigation committee was independent, acted in good faith and conducted a thorough investigation.  It thus rejected the appellants' argument that the trial court should have applied the summary judgment standard, to which de novo review would apply on appeal. 

For those interested in California's position on Auerbach versus Zapata, see this post.  Readers in the jurisprudence of special litigation committees in Delaware will want to read this recent post by Professor Stephen Bainbridge.

© 2010-2023 Allen Matkins Leck Gamble Mallory & Natsis LLP National Law Review, Volume XII, Number 262
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement

About this Author

Keith Paul Bishop, Corporate Transactions Lawyer, finance securities attorney, Allen Matkins Law Firm
Partner

Keith Bishop works with privately held and publicly traded companies on federal and state corporate and securities transactions, compliance, and governance matters. He is highly-regarded for his in-depth knowledge of the distinctive corporate and regulatory requirements faced by corporations in the state of California.

While many law firms have a great deal of expertise in federal or Delaware corporate law, Keith’s specific focus on California corporate and securities law is uncommon. A former California state regulator of securities and financial institutions, Keith has decades of...

949-851-5428
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement