Multiple Choice
In CASE 20.1 Smith v.Van Gorkom (1985) ,plaintiff-shareholders alleged the directors were grossly negligent in failing to inform themselves adequately before making a decision about a merger.How did the court rule and why?
A) For plaintiff-shareholders,because the board failed to obtain adequate information on merger terms and therefore was not protected by the business judgment rule.
B) For directors,because the board was protected by the business judgment rule since there was no conflict of interest.
C) For the directors,but the board was not protected by the business judgment rule but rather by the business merger rule.
D) For the directors,because the board was protected by the business judgment rule since fraud could not be established.
Correct Answer:

Verified
Correct Answer:
Verified
Q33: _ is a purchase of a dissident
Q34: A transaction that benefits a director's self-interest
Q35: Breakup fees are liquidated damages for a
Q36: A contractual provision insisted upon by a
Q37: A shareholder who owns sufficient shares to
Q39: In evaluating a buyout proposal,the directors should
Q40: Companies listed on the New York Stock
Q41: Which of the following is NOT a
Q42: In CASE 20.2 In re Citigroup Inc.Shareholder
Q43: The Omnicare,Inc.v.NCS Healthcare,Inc.case,involved a question of whether