Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

The Corporate CounselorKickerFeaturesTopicsLitigationSectionsNewsLJN Newsletters

When Delaware Companies Are Required to Advance Fees

By Kimberly S. Greer
October 29, 2008

A recent Delaware Chancery Court case may send Delaware companies scrambling to review their bylaws to determine if they are required to advance fees in more instances than first thought. On June 23, 2008, in an instance of first impression, the court held that a company had to advance fees to its prior outside litigation counsel in subsequent litigation by the company against the law firm, under the company bylaws covering advancement of fees for its “agents.”

Just four days earlier, the court issued two other opinions in advancement of fees cases which also emphasized that the language of a company's advancement of fees provision is essential to defining when a company has to advance fees. The first case held that a company cannot withhold advancement of fees to its former directors under a broadly worded advancement of fees provision, just because the former directors refused to accept settlement proposals in the underlying securities litigation. The second case held that where the company was only obligated to provide advancement of fees for the defense or other defensive disposition of actual or threatened proceedings, the company had no obligation to advance fees to a former board member who had filed a lawsuit against the company following his removal for cause from the board.

This premium content is locked for LJN Newsletters subscribers only

  • Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
  • Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
  • Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts

For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473

Read These Next
The DOJ's Corporate Enforcement Policy: One Year Later Image

The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.

The DOJ's New Parameters for Evaluating Corporate Compliance Programs Image

The parameters set forth in the DOJ's memorandum have implications not only for the government's evaluation of compliance programs in the context of criminal charging decisions, but also for how defense counsel structure their conference-room advocacy seeking declinations or lesser sanctions in both criminal and civil investigations.

Use of Deferred Prosecution Agreements In White Collar Investigations Image

This article discusses the practical and policy reasons for the use of DPAs and NPAs in white-collar criminal investigations, and considers the NDAA's new reporting provision and its relationship with other efforts to enhance transparency in DOJ decision-making.

Bankruptcy Sales: Finding a Diamond In the Rough Image

There is no efficient market for the sale of bankruptcy assets. Inefficient markets yield a transactional drag, potentially dampening the ability of debtors and trustees to maximize value for creditors. This article identifies ways in which investors may more easily discover bankruptcy asset sales.

Compliance Officers: Recent Regulatory Guidance and Enforcement Actions and Mitigating the Risk of Personal Liability Image

This article explores legal developments over the past year that may impact compliance officer personal liability.