Simeone v. Walt Disney Co.

302 A.3d 956 (2023)

From our private database of 47,100+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Simeone v. Walt Disney Co.

Delaware Court of Chancery
302 A.3d 956 (2023)

Facts

Florida House Bill 1557 (HB 1557) limited instruction regarding sexual orientation and gender identity in Florida classrooms. The Walt Disney Company (Disney) (defendant), one of Florida’s largest employers, declined to take any public position on the bill. Disney’s employees and affiliates heavily criticized that decision. At Disney’s annual stockholder meeting, CEO Robert Chapek acknowledged the discontent and stated that Disney would oppose the bill and similar legislation. On March 28, the same day Florida’s governor signed HB 1557 into law, Disney issued a public statement opposing the bill. Florida’s legislature responded by dissolving a special tax district that encompassed the Walt Disney World Resort, increasing Disney’s tax liability and reducing its self-governance of the area. Disney’s stock price dropped significantly. A lawyer at a public-interest law firm solicited longtime Disney shareholder Kenneth Simeone (plaintiff) to serve Disney, a Delaware corporation, with a demand to inspect corporate books and records under Delaware Code Title 8, § 220. The demand expressed concern that Disney’s directors and officers might have breached their fiduciary duties to the corporation and its shareholders by opposing HB 1557 without regard for potential consequences. To investigate potential wrongdoing and mismanagement, the demand sought, among other things, minutes from board meetings and emails between the Disney directors discussing relevant events over a three-year period. Disney stated that the demand was invalid because it lacked a proper purpose. Nevertheless, Disney provided certain redacted policies and board minutes to Simeone. Simeone then sued Disney under § 220 to compel an inspection of books and records. As events unfolded, it became clear that Simeone had little involvement in making the original demand or filing the suit. Instead, the soliciting lawyer made the filings, and her firm advanced all costs. The Delaware Court of Chancery considered whether to grant the inspection petition.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Will, 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 911,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

  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.

Here's why 911,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 47,100 briefs, keyed to 997 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 911,000 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
  • 47,100 briefs - keyed to 997 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