Eccles v. Shamrock Capital Advisors, LLC
New York Court of Appeals
245 N.E.3d 1110, 42 N.Y.3d 321, 220 N.Y.S.3d 661 (2024)
- Written by Jamie Milne, JD
Facts
FanDuel Ltd. was a Scottish corporation that facilitated fantasy-sports betting. Its articles identified the UK Companies Act as its governing law. After FanDuel expanded into the American market, it established its headquarters in New York. However, FanDuel maintained offices in Scotland. Also, only 10 to 15 percent of FanDuel’s revenue came from New York residents. FanDuel eventually merged with Paddy Power Betfair plc (Paddy). The way FanDuel’s directors (defendants) valued FanDuel’s assets, the proceeds from the merger provided a return only to FanDuel’s preferred shareholders. FanDuel’s common shareholders received nothing. One hundred of the common shareholders and the founding members of FanDuel (collectively, the common shareholders) (plaintiffs), some of whom lived in Scotland, sued FanDuel’s directors in New York state court. They argued that the directors were liable under New York law because they breached fiduciary duties owed to shareholders. The directors moved to dismiss the suit, arguing, among other things, that under the internal-affairs doctrine, Scots law, the law of the place of FanDuel’s incorporation, governed the dispute. The directors claimed that the common shareholders did not have a viable claim under Scots law. The trial court held that New York law governed. The state appeals court reversed, holding that Scots law governed and that the common shareholders had not asserted a viable cause of action under Scots law. The common shareholders appealed to the New York Court of Appeals, the state’s highest court.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Singas, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 953,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 47,400 briefs, keyed to 1,005 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.
- AI-generated podcast version of every brief — listen on the go, between classes, or whenever reading isn’t an option. New

