Summary

Thurgood Marshall Kamen v. Kemper Financial Services Inc…

Superimposing a rule of universal-demand over the corporate doctrine of these States would clearly upset the balance that they have struck between the power of the individual shareholder and the power of the directors to control corporate litigation. Under the law of Delaware and the States that follow its lead, a shareholder who makes demand may not later assert that demand was in fact excused as futile.
Source: Wikisource

Thurgood Marshall Kamen v. Kemper Financial Services Inc…

So long as a federal court endeavors to reproduce through independent review standards the allocation of managerial power embodied in the demand futility doctrine, KFS' universal-demand rule will merely shift the focus of threshold litigation from the question whether demand is excused to the question whether the directors' decision to terminate the suit is entitled to deference under federal standards.
Source: Wikisource

Thurgood Marshall Kamen v. Kemper Financial Services Inc…

Because the scope of the demand requirement embodies the incorporating State's allocation of governing powers within the corporation, and because a futility exception to demand does not impede the purposes of the Investment Company Act, we decline to displace state law with a uniform rule abolishing the futility exception in federal derivative actions.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature