Confirm favorite deletion?
Business Entities Keyed to Chiappinelli
McKesson Corp. v. Derdiger
Citation:793 A.2d 385 (Del. Ch. 2002)
Only StudyBuddy Pro offers the complete Case Brief Anatomy*
Access the most important case brief elements for optimal case understanding.
*Case Brief Anatomy includes: Brief Prologue, Complete Case Brief, Brief Epilogue
- The Brief Prologue provides necessary case brief introductory information and includes:
- Topic: Identifies the topic of law and where this case fits within your course outline.
- Parties: Identifies the cast of characters involved in the case.
- Procedural Posture & History: Shares the case history with how lower courts have ruled on the matter.
- Case Key Terms, Acts, Doctrines, etc.: A case specific Legal Term Dictionary.
- Case Doctrines, Acts, Statutes, Amendments and Treatises: Identifies and Defines Legal Authority used in this case.
- The Case Brief is the complete case summarized and authored in the traditional Law School I.R.A.C. format. The Pro case brief includes:
- Brief Facts: A Synopsis of the Facts of the case.
- Rule of Law: Identifies the Legal Principle the Court used in deciding the case.
- Facts: What are the factual circumstances that gave rise to the civil or criminal case? What is the relationship of the Parties that are involved in the case. Review the Facts of this case here:
McKesson Corporation mailed copies of its proxy statement to its stockholders informing them of its annual meeting, scheduled for July 25, 2001. On July 17, 2001, Derdiger’s counsel delivered a letter to McKesson asserting that the record date failed to comply with the sixty-day requirement. In addition, this letter requested that McKesson’s board reschedule the annual meeting and redistribute proxy materials to the stockholders who would be eligible to vote under the new record date. In response, McKesson’s counsel delivered a letter, dated July 23, 2001, to Derdiger’s counsel, insisting that the May 25 record date complied with the statute. On July 24, 2001, the day before the annual meeting, Derdiger’s counsel faxed a rely explaining his concern that the meeting would be void for statutory non-compliance. In order to remove any uncertainty as to the legal validity of actions taken at the annual meeting, McKesson brought this action against Derdiger.
- Issue(s): Lists the Questions of Law that are raised by the Facts of the case.
- Holding: Shares the Court's answer to the legal questions raised in the issue.
- Concurring / Dissenting Opinions: Includes valuable concurring or dissenting opinions and their key points.
- Reasoning and Analysis: Identifies the chain of argument(s) which led the judges to rule as they did.
- The Brief Prologue closes the case brief with important forward-looking discussion and includes:
- Policy: Identifies the Policy if any that has been established by the case.
- Court Direction: Shares where the Court went from here for this case.