← All Authorities
United States Leading Case duty to promote success s172

Lyondell Chemical Co v Ryan

970 A.2d 235 (Del. 2009)
JurisdictionUnited States
CourtDelaware Supreme Court
Year2009
StatusBinding authority

Summary

Revlon duties do not mandate a specific process; director liability arises only if they knowingly and completely failed to seek the best sale price.

Key Principle

Revlon does not require a specific course of action; directors breach their duty only if they knowingly and completely fail to attempt to obtain the best sale price.

Area of Law

corporate

Related Cases

ASIC v Cassimatis (No 8) (2016) 336 ALR 209

Directors breached their duty of care under s.180 Corporations Act by failing to prevent the company from providing inappropriate financial advice to retail clients.

Tornetta v Musk C.A. No. 2018-0408-KSJM (Del. Ch. 2024)

Board compensation decisions favouring a controlling stockholder require entire fairness review; subsequent stockholder ratification does not restore business judgment deference.

Slack Technologies LLC v Pirani 598 U.S. 759 (2023)

Section 11 of the Securities Act requires plaintiffs to trace their shares to the allegedly misleading registration statement; claims fail where shares cannot be so traced in a direct listing.

Ask CommonBench about this case

Get a detailed analysis of Lyondell Chemical Co v Ryan and how it applies to your situation.

Explain Lyondell Chemical Co v Ryan