ADVERTISEMENT



Google       

Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Corporate Governance Blogs -> The Race to the Bottom

OR PHONE (866) 635-1838 for Bankruptcy Help, (866) 635-6190 for Divorce,
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense

Find a Local Lawyer

Bankruptcy (866) 635-1838
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402

Bookmark

Corporate Governance

: The Race to the Bottom

Ryan v. Lyondell Chemical Company and Waiver of Liability Provisions (Interlocutory Appeal Denied)(The Need for Gender Diversity and Gender Neutrality)

By J. Robert Brown

ADVERTISEMENTS

One of the things we in the ivory tower like to stress is the need for students to act in a gender neutral manner when writing briefs or making arguments.  After all, the days when the bench was a male dominated bastion are largely over.  Insensitivity to the issue can, therefore, be embarrassing. 

But not all courts are in fact particularly diverse when it comes to gender.  Delaware is a good example.  The Delaware Chancery court has five Chancellors, all men.  The Delaware Supreme Court?  Five Justices, one woman.   So,about 25% of all lawyers, and 44% of all law students, are women, but in the most important corporate law court in the United States, there is only one.  Indeed, it's roughly the same percentage as the number of women in public company board room (13%).

Which leads us back to the lessons from the ivory tower.  VC Noble's opinion in Lyondell could have used a good editor with an eye toward gender neutrality.  In his opinion, he uses the male gender when making a generic point.  Thus, in footnote 39, VC Noble explains:

  • "Yes, undeniably, the directors, in this instance, managed to achieve a good result, but a fiduciary?s discharge of his duties and obligations are not judged merely by the result he achieves." (emphasis added)  Sometimes writers alternate genders but this is not the case in Lyondell. 

The only example?  Not quite.  There was also this one in footnote 17:   

  • the Court?s decision, as Ryan correctly points out in his brief opposing certification of an interlocutory appeal, will in no way impede a properly motivated and unconflicted corporate director who attempts to discharge his fiduciary obligations in good faith from successfully asserting a Section 102(b)(7) defense on a fully developed summary judgment record (or at any other proper procedural state, for that matter).  

Perhaps if the bench in Delaware were more representative, these things wouldn't happen.  Perhaps if they were more representative, the decisions wouldn't be so consistently oriented against shareholders.

The opinion and some of the pleadings can be found at the DU Corporate Governance web site.

Full post as published by The Race to the Bottom on September 12, 2008 (boomark / email).

Bloggers, promote your law blog by nominating your blog for inclusion in USLaw.com's Law Blog Directory and RSS Reader. Benefits described.
Related Law Articles

Lawsuits and Settlements

Related Searches

























































































































US Law
#1 Online Legal Resource













Your Blog Subscriptions
Subscribe to blogs

10,000+ Law Job Listings
Lawyer . Police . Paralegal . Etc
Earn a law-related degree
Are you the author of this blog? Adding USLaw.com to your Blogroll increases relevance. You qualify to display a USLaw Network badge.
Suggest changes to this blog's description or nominate another for inclusion. Register for updates.


Practice Area
Zip Code:

Contact a Lawyer Now!






0.0138 secs (new cache)