California State Teachers' Retirement System v. Alvarez

179 A.3d 824 (2018)

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

California State Teachers’ Retirement System v. Alvarez

Delaware Supreme Court
179 A.3d 824 (2018)

  • Written by Rose VanHofwegen, JD

Facts

After the New York Times reported an alleged bribery scheme and cover-up at Wal-Mart de Mexico, multiple shareholders, including California State Teachers’ Retirement System (plaintiffs) sued Wal-Mart Inc. (Wal-Mart) and its executives and directors, including Aida Alvarez (defendants) in Delaware state court, while other shareholders sued in Arkansas federal court. Initially, the Arkansas federal court stayed its proceedings pending the outcome of the Delaware litigation. Delaware chancellor Strine urged the claimants to make a books-and-records demand to prepare the strongest complaint possible. When the Delaware shareholders claimed Wal-Mart’s response was deficient, a three-year discovery dispute including a trial and appeal ensued. Meanwhile, more than a dozen attorneys from several firms represented the Arkansas shareholders, including lead counsel who had successfully prosecuted Delaware books-and-records litigation before. Those attorneys knew about Strine’s warning and that implicating a board usually required internal documents showing board-level knowledge but decided to rely instead on internal memoranda linked in the Times article that they thought proved board knowledge years beforehand. Those memoranda turned out to show officers but not directors involved in the scandal, such that once the stay lifted, the Arkansas federal court dismissed the complaint for failure to plead demand futility. Wal-Mart’s executives and directors moved to dismiss the Delaware litigation, arguing the Arkansas decision collaterally estopped the Delaware shareholders from relitigating the demand-futility issue. The Delaware court agreed and dismissed the Delaware litigation based on issue preclusion. The shareholders appealed.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Valihura, 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 745,000 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 745,000 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 745,000 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