Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 01 NOVEMBER 2012

A New Wave Of Say-On-Pay And Executive Compensation Proxy Litigation

Katten
Katten
Contributor
Katten

Katten

With client service at our core and a collective desire to foster an inclusive environment for a...

View firm profile
Explore more from Katten

Nobody can accuse the plaintiffs’ shareholder bar of suffering from a lack of creativity or being easily dissuaded from purporting to represent shareholders.

United StatesLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration

Nobody can accuse the plaintiffs' shareholder bar of suffering from a lack of creativity or being easily dissuaded from purporting to represent shareholders. Congress enacted the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (the "Dodd-Frank Act") in July 2010. Section 951 of Dodd-Frank requires a shareholder advisory vote on executive compensation (a "say-on-pay" vote). The Dodd-Frank Act, however, "specifically provides" that the say-on-pay vote (1) "shall not be binding on the issuer or the board of directors," and (2) does not "create or imply any change to the fiduciary duties of the board members." 15 U.S.C. § 78n-1(c)). Nonetheless, the plaintiffs' bar began filing shareholder derivative lawsuits alleging breach of fiduciary duty following an issuer's failed say-on-pay vote. The vast majority of these cases have been dismissed because the plaintiff failed to make demand on the company's board of directors before bringing suit. See Gordon v. Goodyear,

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from