A Second Look at the Decision in Chen v. Howard-Anderson

, Delaware Business Court Insider


Much has been written about the Court of Chancery's recent opinion in Chen v. Howard-Anderson, 87 A.3d 648 (Del. Ch. 2014), in which Vice Chancellor J. Travis Laster suggested, among other things, that the appropriate inquiry in determining whether directors are entitled in the context of a change of control transaction to claim the protection of an exculpatory clause in a corporation's certificate of incorporation is broader than the "conscious disregard" standard applied by the Delaware Supreme Court in Lyondell Chemical v. Ryan, 970 A.2d 235 (Del. 2009).

This content has been archived. It is available exclusively through our partner LexisNexis®.

To view this content, please continue to Lexis Advance®.

Continue to Lexis Advance®

Not a Lexis Advance® Subscriber? Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® is now the exclusive third party online distributor of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® customers will be able to access and use ALM's content by subscribing to the LexisNexis® services via Lexis Advance®. This includes content from the National Law Journal®, The American Lawyer®, Law Technology News®, The New York Law Journal® and Corporate Counsel®, as well as ALM's other newspapers, directories, legal treatises, published and unpublished court opinions, and other sources of legal information.

ALM's content plays a significant role in your work and research, and now through this alliance LexisNexis® will bring you access to an even more comprehensive collection of legal content.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at customercare@alm.com

What's being said

Comments are not moderated. To report offensive comments, click here.

Preparing comment abuse report for Article #1202657981662

Thank you!

This article's comments will be reviewed.