Skip to main content

Lance Salladay v. Bruce L. Lev

Del. Ch.February 27, 2020No. CA No. 2019-0048-SG
Facing something similar at work?Check your rights — free, private, no sign-up

Case Details

Judge(s)
Glasscock, V.C.
Status — whether other courts must follow this ruling
Published
Procedural Posture — the stage the case had reached
motion to dismiss

Related Laws

No specific laws identified for this ruling.

Claim Types

Breach of Contract

Outcome

Court denied defendant directors' motion to dismiss, finding that entire fairness remained the standard of review for a conflicted going-private transaction. The court ruled that the special committee's involvement was too late to replicate arm's-length dealing and stockholder disclosures were inadequate.

What This Ruling Means

**The Dispute** Lance Salladay sued Bruce L. Lev in a case involving Intersections, Inc., claiming breach of contract. The case centered around a business transaction that was approved by the company's board of directors, but there were concerns that board members had conflicts of interest when making this decision. **The Court's Decision** The court denied a motion to dismiss the case, allowing it to proceed. The judge ruled that because board members had conflicts of interest, the transaction must be reviewed under a stricter legal standard called "entire fairness." The court also found that a special committee formed by the company could not fix the problems with how the decision was made, because the committee was created too late in the process and didn't provide adequate information to shareholders. **Why This Matters for Workers** This ruling is significant because it shows courts will scrutinize corporate decisions more closely when company leaders have conflicts of interest. For workers, this means there's stronger oversight of corporate governance, which can protect employee interests when companies make major business decisions that might affect jobs, benefits, or working conditions. The decision reinforces that corporate boards must act fairly and transparently.

This summary was generated to explain the ruling in plain English and is not legal advice.

Browse Related

Facing something similar at work?

Court rulings like this one are useful, but every situation is different. Take 2 minutes to see which laws may protect you — it's free, private, and no account is required to start.

This ruling information is sourced from public court records via CourtListener.com. Case outcomes, claim types, and summaries are extracted using AI analysis and may be incomplete or inaccurate. It is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.

See something wrong, or named in this ruling and want it corrected or redacted? Request a correction.