From our private database of 46,200+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.
Marx v. Akers
Court of Appeals of New York
88 N.Y.2d 189 (1996)
- Written by Max Milstein, JD
Facts
New York law stated that in a shareholder derivative action, a complaint must state what steps the plaintiff took to get the board of directors to take the plaintiff’s preferred course of action. The board of directors of International Business Machines (IBM) (defendant) voted for compensation for three members of the board who were also IBM executives, including Akers (defendant), a former CEO. The board also voted for compensation for directors who were not executives. Marx (plaintiff) was displeased with this course of action, and filed a derivative action, without first making a demand of the board of directors. The trial court dismissed for failure to make a demand, and Marx appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Smith, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 782,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,200 briefs, keyed to 988 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.
