Logourl black
From our private database of 14,000+ case briefs...

Calma v. Templeton

Delaware Court of Chancery
2015 WL 1951930 (2015)


Facts

Citrix Systems, Inc. (Citrix) (defendant) paid its non-employee directors (defendants) pursuant to its Equity Incentive Plan (the Plan), which was approved by a majority of disinterested stockholders. The Plan did not directly specify compensation amounts for non-employee directors, but it established a compensation committee to determine such amounts. The Plan gave the compensation committee absolute authority to determine specific compensation amounts, with the exception that it established a generic limit on each person’s annual compensation. However, this limit was one million shares, which, during the relevant time period, was worth approximately $55 million. The compensation committee consisted of three of the non-employee-director defendants. From 2011 to 2013, the defendants’ compensation was generally in the range of $300,000 to $400,000. Citrix stockholders did not approve any of these specific compensation amounts. John Calma (plaintiff), a Citrix stockholder, brought a derivative suit against the defendants alleging, among other things, a breach of the fiduciary duty of loyalty. The defendants filed a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim, arguing that the Citrix stockholders had ratified the Plan, and thus any compensation awarded thereunder.

Rule of Law

The rule of law is the black letter law upon which the court rested its decision.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Issue

The issue section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Holding and Reasoning (Bouchard, J.)

The holding and reasoning section includes:

  • A “yes” or “no” answer to the question framed in the issue section;
  • A summary of the majority or plurality opinion, using the CREAC method; and
  • The procedural disposition (e.g. reversed and remanded, affirmed, etc.).

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

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 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read 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. Read more about Quimbee.

Here's why 176,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,000 briefs, keyed to 188 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.