This session will provide a comprehensive understanding of the Business Judgment Rule (BJR) as it applies to corporate governance, with a specific focus on how directors and officers can navigate potential litigation. The session will start with a foundational overview of the BJR, followed by an in-depth analysis of the key legal cases that have shaped its application. Additionally, the session will delve into the strategies for advising corporate clients—particularly directors and officers—on how to avoid becoming targets of litigation, including the role of independent board directors in mitigating risk.
Session Structure and Key Topics:
1. Introduction to the Business Judgment Rule (BJR)
Objective: Provide a foundational understanding of the BJR and its role in corporate governance.
- Definition of the BJR and its purpose in protecting directors and officers from liability.
--- The BJR presumption: when courts defer to the decisions of corporate leaders.
--- Key elements required to invoke the BJR: good faith, rationality, and lack of conflicts of interest.
--- Key areas where the BJR applies: financial decisions, strategic direction, and operational oversight.
2. Key Legal Cases Shaping the Business Judgment Rule
Objective: Explore the landmark cases that have defined and evolved the application of the BJR.
- Smith v. Van Gorkom (1985): The duty of care in decision-making and its relation to the BJR.
- Aronson v. Lewis (1984): The standard for judging board decisions and establishing the BJR presumption.
- In re Caremark International Inc. Derivative Litigation (1996): The BJR's application in oversight and monitoring duties.
- Stone v. Ritter (2006): Examining the role of good faith and the implications for directors' oversight responsibilities.
- Directors' duty of loyalty vs. duty of care: Understanding the balance and how courts distinguish between them.
3. Litigating Business Judgment: Defending and Pursuing Claims
Objective: Offer insight into the litigation landscape for D&O claims and how the BJR impacts defense and pursuit of litigation.
- Litigating under the BJR: When the rule can be overcome by plaintiffs and how courts assess the decision-making process of directors.
- Strategies for defending directors and officers in lawsuits, including the use of the BJR as a key defense.
- How plaintiffs attempt to overcome the BJR (e.g., allegations of bad faith, lack of independence, or conflicts of interest).
- Case studies and trends in shareholder derivative suits and class actions.
4. How to Advise Directors and Officers to Avoid Becoming Targets of Litigation
Objective: Discuss proactive strategies for corporate advisors to help directors and officers avoid litigation exposure.
- Best practices for documenting decisions to ensure alignment with the BJR.
- The importance of maintaining a robust conflict-of-interest policy and board independence.
- Key governance practices that mitigate risks: regular board evaluations, clear delegation of authority, and transparency in decision-making.
- Ensuring compliance with statutory and fiduciary duties—particularly in distressed situations.
- The role of internal and external advisors in helping directors navigate complex situations.
5. The Role of Independent Board Directors in Mitigating Risk
Objective: Highlight the importance of independent directors in protecting the organization and its leadership from litigation.
- Defining the role and responsibilities of independent board members.
- How independent directors help reinforce the BJR in decision-making processes.
- The critical role of independent directors in distressed or bankruptcy situations.
- Best practices for selecting, empowering, and working with independent board directors to safeguard against personal liability.
Target Audience:
General Business Bankruptcy Counsel | Corporate Governance Professionals | Directors and Officers (D&O) | Litigators specializing in corporate governance and D&O cases | Financial Advisors specializing in distressed situations and workouts | CROs
Learning Objectives:
- Gain a comprehensive understanding of the Business Judgment Rule and its importance in corporate governance.
- Analyze major legal cases and their impact on the application of the BJR.
- Develop strategies for defending and pursuing litigation involving directors and officers.
- Learn proactive strategies for advising directors and officers to minimize the risk of personal liability and litigation.
- Understand the importance of independent board directors in mitigating risks for directors and officers.
Business
Suggested Speakers
Congress granted creditors a right to an accelerated recovery of their claims through FRBP 3001. This rule is the foundation for selling a bankruptcy claim but, until recently, the integrity and liquidity of the claims market was challenged by an absence of the typical features of modern capital markets. Few creditors were able to identify potential purchasers, conduct price discovery and maximize competition for their claims. Online marketplaces developed, making a global market and rapid price discovery easily accessible, and allowing unrestricted competitive pressures to inform bid/ask price disclosure and immediately actionable supply and demand. Although the market has undergone a significant transformation, a number of recent cases have tested the rules and procedures of bankruptcy courts, clerks and claim administrators to properly manage the tens of millions of claims, and hundreds of billions of dollars owed annually to creditors who enjoy a right to liquidity.
• Understanding of the background/context for FRBP 3001
• Understanding of historical market characteristics and functionality
• Understanding of the emergence of online marketplaces
• Discussion of recent cases and the impediments to improved market functionality
• Discussion of opportunities for further market development and improvement
Creditor
Suggested Speakers
Brian
Davidoff
bdavidoff@greenbergglusker.com
Matthew
Sedigh
matt@x-claim.com
Andrew
Glantz
andrew@x-claim.com
Brian
Davidoff
bdavidoff@greenbergglusker.com
Greenberg Glusker LLP
Debtor estates and other distressed stakeholders can monetize formerly contaminated parcels which have no higher or better use than solar by leasing or selling those assets to specialized brownfields-to-solar developers. These niche developers can buy suitable parcels outright or offer twenty-year leases which can be transferred with the property. The Inflation Reduction Act and renewable energy-friendly states provide significant financial incentives which allow for generous lease rates. Bankruptcy trustees, debtor estates, creditors and other stakeholders have begun exploring this monetization strategy, which can be accomplished out of court, as long as the assets are at least partially remediated.
What is the brownfields solar financial model, whether through lease or acquisition, and how much revenue would it generate in a sample project?
What types of real estate assets are suitable for solar siting (and no other, higher/better uses)?
What geographical locations/states provide the best financial incentives (tax incentives, rec programs, high power rates) to generate the highest lease rate or purchase price for a trustee, debtor estate or other stakeholder?
What are the relevant provisions of the Inflation Reduction Act?
What are some of the relevant provisions in states with favorable policies?
How can a trustee, debtor estate or other stakeholder mitigate the environmental risk associated with brownfields solar projects?
How can public sector creditors properly dispose of or monetize through lease brownfield properties where the property owner is missing or refuses to appear in court proceedings?
Can environmental liabilities be discharged under section 363 of the Bankruptcy Code? Is that necessary in the context of developing solar on brownfields?
Debtor
Suggested Speakers
