August 11, 2005
Tower Air
Posted by Account Deleted
A commenter to one of my posts refers to the Tower Air case in the Third Circuit as being “much more relevant” to the future of fiduciary duties. I don’t think so. That case was (1) decided before Disney; (2) a decision before trial; (3) did not opine on the effect of 102(b)(7); and (4) applies a federal pleading rule. If points 1-3 aren’t enough, on point 4, even if the court reaches the right result both as to the applicable law and as to the application of that law, I do not think the future of internal governance law is in the federal courts.
TrackBack URL for this entry:
https://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8345157d569e200d8351d763853ef
Links to weblogs that reference Tower Air:
Bloggers
Papers
Posts
Recent Comments
Popular Threads
Search The Glom
The Glom on Twitter
Follow The Glom on
Archives by Topic
Archives by Date
| Sun | Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | ||
| 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 |
| 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 |
| 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 |
| 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 |
Miscellaneous Links
