Matter of DISH Network Derivative Litigation

401 P.3d 1081 (Nev. 2017)

From our private database of 46,300+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Matter of DISH Network Derivative Litigation

Nevada Supreme Court
401 P.3d 1081 (Nev. 2017)

  • Written by Rose VanHofwegen, JD

Facts

Shareholder Jacksonville Police and Fire Pension Fund (Jacksonville) brought a derivative action on behalf of Nevada corporation DISH Network Corporation (DISH) (plaintiffs) challenging actions taken by chairman and chief executive officer Charles Ergen and 10 other executives and directors (defendants) after DISH acquired debt in a company that filed bankruptcy. Named directors included Ergen’s wife, Cantey Ergen, the Ergens’ close personal friends Tom Oltorf and George Brokaw, and independent directors Charles Lillis and Thomas Cullen. Initially the board appointed a special litigation committee (SLC) composed of Oltorf and Brokaw to investigate Jacksonville’s claims. When Jacksonville challenged the SLC’s independence because of Oltorf and Brokaw’s close ties to the Ergens, the board added Lillis and provided the SLC could not act without his affirmative vote. The SLC monitored the bankruptcy proceedings and conducted a comprehensive investigation for almost a year, conducting interviews, reviewing documents, obtaining legal advice, and holding multiple meetings. The SLC concluded Jacksonville’s claims should be dismissed and moved the court to defer to that determination. Jacksonville again challenged the SLC’s independence. The court found Lillis was independent, which, combined with the voting structure, made the SLC independent; deferred to the SLC’s determination; and dismissed the case. Jacksonville appealed, arguing Lillis lacked independence solely because he and Cullen had worked together before and saw each other socially once or twice a year, without challenging the finding that Lillis lacked financial or business connections to others in the lawsuit beyond serving on DISH’s board.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Gibbons, 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 811,000 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 811,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 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.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 811,000 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
  • 46,300 briefs - keyed to 988 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