Beatrice Corwin Living Irrevocable Trust v. Pfizer, Inc.

2016 WL 4548101 (2016)

From our private database of 46,100+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Beatrice Corwin Living Irrevocable Trust v. Pfizer, Inc.

Delaware Court of Chancery
2016 WL 4548101 (2016)

  • Written by Rose VanHofwegen, JD

Facts

Robert and Marilyn Corwin were trustees of the Beatrice Corwin Living Irrevocable Trust (plaintiffs), which owned 500 shares of Delaware pharmaceutical company Pfizer, Inc. (defendant). The Corwins alleged Pfizer’s financial statements did not meet generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) because the statements did not report the repatriation-tax liability Pfizer deferred by reinvesting earnings overseas. The trustees sued seeking to inspect Pfizer’s books and records to value the trust’s shares, investigate possible mismanagement and breaches of the board’s fiduciary duties to ensure compliance with accounting rules, and evaluate the potential for shareholder or derivative litigation. The applicable GAAP standard required a company to report deferred repatriation-tax liability on its financial statements unless the company stated that calculating that liability would be “not practicable.” The trustees’ expert testified it would be practicable for Pfizer to calculate that liability because Pfizer made other tax calculations annually that required essentially the same calculation. Pfizer’s board of directors countered that it had relied on an audit opinion prepared by major accounting firm KPMG International Limited (KMPG). The audit committee of Pfizer’s board of directors and management had met with KPMG to review Pfizer’s financial statements, and KPMG provided an unqualified opinion to the board that Pfizer’s statements were prepared in accordance with GAAP. The trustees did not argue or present any evidence that the board did not rely on KPMG, believe the opinion was outside its expertise, or select KPMG with reasonable care.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (LeGrow, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 744,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 744,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,100 briefs, keyed to 987 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 744,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,100 briefs - keyed to 987 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership