Professor Ribstein — who was prescient in predicting the outcome of the corporate case of the decade — can rest easy.
In a ruling issued yesterday afternoon, the Delaware Supreme Court upheld the Delaware Chancellory Court’s decision dismissing the civil lawsuit brought by certain Disney shareholders against the board of Walt Disney Co. for approving the rather generous $140 million severance package paid to former Disney executive Michael Ovitz after Ovitz was effectively fired by his longtime friend and former Disney CEO Michael Eisner for essentially doing nothing during Ovitz’s year as president Disney. A copy of the decision is here, and here are initial comments from corporate law scholars Professor Ribstein, Professor Bainbridge and Professor Smith.
Steven Schulman, the former Milberg Weiss partner who has bigger problems now than the loss in the Disney-Ovitz case, pursued the case on behalf of certain Disney shareholders and contended that the Disney board’s decision-making process amounted to a series of sham “jam sessions” in which the board abrogated its responsibilities to Disney shareholders by rubberstamping the Eisner-supported severance deal for Ovitz. However, the Delaware Supreme Court upheld the Chancellory Court’s decision that was critical of the Disney board, but concluded that Eisner and the other Disney directors acted in good faith in approving Ovitz’s termination without cause and thus, were immunized from liability to shareholders regardless of whether approving the generous severance may have been a bad decision.