The Delaware Court of Chancery last week applied Arkansas law in dismissing a Wal-Mart stockholders’ derivative action stemming from the alleged bribery of Mexican officials, finding the Delaware suit mirrored a complaint tossed by an Arkansas federal judge for failing to plead demand futility.
The Delaware case, captioned In re Wal-Mart Stores Delaware Derivative Litigation, was one of 15 derivative suits spurred by a 2012 report in The New York Times that alleged a cover-up of a supposed $24 million bribery scheme involving Wal-Mart’s Mexico subsidiary. Some of those were filed in Delaware, where Wal-Mart is incorporated, and the others proceeded in Arkansas, where the world’s largest retailer maintains its headquarters.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
