Damning Dictum: The Default Duty Debate in Delaware

M. Manesh
{"title":"Damning Dictum: The Default Duty Debate in Delaware","authors":"M. Manesh","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2222136","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Bizarrely, in 2013, even the most sophisticated business lawyer could not answer a seemingly simple question: whether, in the absence of an express agreement to the contrary, the manager of a Delaware limited liability company (LLC) owes traditional fiduciary duties to its members as a default matter? This was not always the case. For years, this question was settled — settled at least in the Delaware Court of Chancery. But in November 2012, the Delaware Supreme Court cast doubt on a long line of chancery court precedent in Gatz Properties v. Auriga Capital. Given the broad freedom of contract available under LLC law, it may be that default duties do not much matter. And, in any case, the uncertainty created by Gatz has now been resolved by recent legislation. Consequently, the lasting impact of Gatz is not on the substantive legal question. Rather, the lasting impact of Gatz is on Delaware law’s reputation for certainty as well as the use of dictum, an established Delaware judicial practice that has been vital to the state’s success in attracting corporate, and now LLC, charters.","PeriodicalId":309706,"journal":{"name":"CGN: Governance Law & Arrangements by Subject Matter (Topic)","volume":"32 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"CGN: Governance Law & Arrangements by Subject Matter (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2222136","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

Bizarrely, in 2013, even the most sophisticated business lawyer could not answer a seemingly simple question: whether, in the absence of an express agreement to the contrary, the manager of a Delaware limited liability company (LLC) owes traditional fiduciary duties to its members as a default matter? This was not always the case. For years, this question was settled — settled at least in the Delaware Court of Chancery. But in November 2012, the Delaware Supreme Court cast doubt on a long line of chancery court precedent in Gatz Properties v. Auriga Capital. Given the broad freedom of contract available under LLC law, it may be that default duties do not much matter. And, in any case, the uncertainty created by Gatz has now been resolved by recent legislation. Consequently, the lasting impact of Gatz is not on the substantive legal question. Rather, the lasting impact of Gatz is on Delaware law’s reputation for certainty as well as the use of dictum, an established Delaware judicial practice that has been vital to the state’s success in attracting corporate, and now LLC, charters.
诅咒的格言:特拉华州的违约责任之争
奇怪的是,在2013年,即使是最老练的商业律师也无法回答一个看似简单的问题:在没有明确相反协议的情况下,特拉华州有限责任公司(LLC)的经理是否对其成员负有传统的受托责任,作为违约事项?但情况并非总是如此。多年来,这个问题得到了解决——至少在特拉华州衡平法院得到了解决。但在2012年11月,特拉华州最高法院对Gatz Properties诉Auriga Capital一案中一长串衡平法院先例提出了质疑。鉴于有限责任公司法律赋予合同的广泛自由,违约责任可能并不重要。而且,无论如何,盖茨事件造成的不确定性现在已经被最近的立法解决了。因此,盖兹案的持久影响并不在于实质性的法律问题。更确切地说,Gatz案的持久影响在于特拉华州法律在确定性和格言使用方面的声誉,这是特拉华州一种既定的司法实践,对该州成功吸引公司(现在是有限责任公司)章程至关重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信