The State of State Anti-takeover Law

Article — Volume 95, Issue 8

95 Va. L. Rev. 1973
Download PDF

This Article is the first to examine systematically state antitakeover law outside Delaware. It conducts a research of all available cases to find whether states with pill endorsement and other constituency statutes follow Delaware’s enhanced fiduciary duties or replace them with weaker standards. It finds substantial variations from Delaware’s law. 

Unlike Delaware, most of the states with relatively strong other constituency and pill endorsement statutes do not impose enhanced fiduciary duties on managers in change-of-control situations. Instead, they apply only the ordinary business judgment rule to management’s use of antitakeover tactics.

This Article has implications for antitakeover law, the market for corporate law, and the desirability of federal intervention. In particular, it provides support for adopting Delaware’s enhanced fiduciary duties—Unocal, Revlon, and Blasius—as federally imposed minimum standards. This would not only improve state antitakeover law outside Delaware, but may also result in improvements to Delaware law since Delaware is currently dragged down by other states.

Click on a link below to access the full text of this article. These are third-party content providers and may require a separate subscription for access.

  Volume 95 / Issue 8  

Making Good on Good Intentions

By Katharine T. Bartlett
95 Va. L. Rev. 1893

The State of State Anti-takeover Law

By Michal Barzuza
95 Va. L. Rev. 1973

Incarceration, Accommodation, and Strict Scrutiny

By James Nelson
95 Va. L. Rev. 2053

Internet Radio: The Case for a Technology Neutral Royalty Standard

By Andrew Stockment
95 Va. L. Rev. 2129