Francis Pileggi has the details.
The bottom line is that where corporate directors are lawfully given the power to amend the bylaws without shareholder approval (such authority is often given in the company's certificate of incorporation), the Delaware courts will enforce them against the shareholders. In a portion of the opinion quoted by Pileggi, the Court reasons:
George Kuney, Lindsay Young Distinguished Professor of Law and Director of the Clayton Center for Entrepreneurial Law at the University of Tennessee College of Law, offers critiques of the modern legal education / recruiting system in his new article, "Addressing Shortfalls in Traditional Legal Education: UT's Concentrations and Capstones and Waller Lansden's Schola2juris Program." Kuney writes:
Relatively unnoticed amidst more publicly-awaited rulings, the Supreme Court held that arbitration clauses in contracts which restrict or eliminate a party's right to seek class treatment will be strictly enforced under the Federal Arbitration Act ("FAA"), 9 U.S.C. § 1 et seq.
At George Mason University's Center for the Protection of Intellectual Property, Wayne Sobon, Vice President and General Counsel of Inventergy, Inc. weighs in on the recent round of patent legislation and associated regulation. According to Sobon:
Full details available here. This is an interesting and exciting development in the field of shareholder appraisal rights because it would allow shareholders to retain liquidity during the pendency of an appraisal action (which can take up to several years depending on the complexity).
There have been many recent articles about “patent trolls.” We previously noted Professor Epstein’s article “Trolling for 'Patent Trolls'” here. But in China, there are also “trademark trolls.” In the 21 June 2013 issue of New Hampshire Bar News, Attorney Teresa Tucker writes:
