TheCorporateCounsel.net

The Delaware Chancery Court recently dismissed a books & records action against The Walt Disney Company premised on alleged breaches of fiduciary duty by the company’s board arising out of its decision to publicly oppose Florida’s “Don’t Say Gay” legislation. The plaintiffs’ contended that the directors breached their duty of loyalty by placing their personal beliefs ahead of the company’s interest by taking positions that impaired its value.

This excerpt from a recent Wilson Sonsini memo on the decision summarizes Vice Chancellor Will’s reasoning:

The court conducted a trial on a paper record, and that record reflected an appropriately engaged and deliberative board. As the controversy first flared, the Disney board convened a special meeting and, shortly thereafter, held a regularly scheduled meeting to discuss the issues. Board minutes captured the board’s engagement. The record showed that Disney leadership took an increasingly public stance in the face of intensifying criticism from its employees and creative partners. Accordingly, the court noted, the board’s decision did not come “at the expense of stockholders.” Rather, the board was motivated by an understanding that “a positive relationship with employees and creative partners is crucial to Disney’s success.”

As such, the court determined that “[i]t is not for this court to question rational judgments about how promoting non-stockholder interests—be it through making a charitable contribution, paying employees higher salaries and benefits, or more general norms like promoting a particular corporate culture—ultimately promote stockholder value.” Meanwhile, no evidence supported the plaintiff’s allegation that the directors’ personal beliefs or their support of organizations that opposed HB 1557 swayed them to act contrary to the interests of the company and its stockholders.

Based on her analysis, Vice Chancellor Will ultimately concluded that the plaintiff did not establish a proper purpose for inspection because it did not sufficiently allege potential wrongdoing by the board.  In an era where companies increasingly find themselves caught in the crossfire of contentious social issues, boards and their advisors are likely to find this excerpt from the Vice Chancellor’s opinion on the latitude that directors have under Delaware law exercise their business judgment to be of some comfort:

Delaware law vests directors with significant discretion to guide corporate strategy—including on social and political issues. Given the diversity of viewpoints held by directors, management, stockholders, and other stakeholders, corporate speech on external policy matters brings both risks and opportunities. The board is empowered to weigh these competing considerations and decide whether it is in the corporation’s best interest to act (or not act).

– John Jenkins