Talk:Smith v. Van Gorkom

Law High‑importance

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

United States: Delaware Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Delaware portal This article is supported by WikiProject Delaware (assessed as Low-importance).

Untitled[edit]

It might be good to discuss Delaware's reaction to this case: which was to essentially overrule this decision by only allowing suits if the board was disloyal and only for non-monetary damages. Jesushouston 17:55, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with File:DelawareSupremeCourtSeal.gif[edit]

The image File:DelawareSupremeCourtSeal.gif is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --09:22, 12 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Criticism[edit]

This article [1] says "That is a shit Wikipedia article, btw. The significance of Smith v. Van Gorkom is that it effectively made a fairness opinions a legal requirement of a public company merger. Somehow that isn’t mentioned. Someone should fix that." Justinc (talk) 09:51, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]