Shareholder Voting Flashcards

1
Q

SHs have rational apathy meaning that it’s rational for them not to ___

A

spend time/resources learning about complex issues at stake

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

Proxy advisory firms have emerged to help _____ overcome the costs ____

A

institutional investors, gathering info necessary to make decisions on SH votes

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

A proxy statement informs SH about ___

A

terms of a business to be voted on

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Proxy is the power of attorney to __

A

allow company’s designee to vote the shares owned by a SH

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

3 reasons the BOD solicits and pays for proxies

A
  • ensure a quorum
  • prevent a “coup” from minority SH
  • SEC requires it
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

The BOD decies which _____ appear on company’s proxy card with the exception of ___

A

proposals/nominees, 14(a)(8)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

What does 14a8 allow

A

SH to submit certain proposals

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Under 14a8, a SH must have ___

A

certain number of shares for certain amount of time

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

14a8 does not cover in particular ___

A

director elections or anything directly affecting upcoming election

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

The only means for a dissident SH to propose alternative board candidate is to ___

A

file separate proxy statement to initiate a proxy fight

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Proxy fights are rare because ___

A

so costly (only reimbursed if you win)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Proxy access can enable dissident SHs to __

A

nominate own nominees without proxy contest

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

Proxy access depends on

A

corps bylaws/charters

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

SH proposals are ___

A

requests made by SH included in the company’s annual meeting agenda

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

___ generally have agenda control

A

Directors

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

SH proposals increased driven by rise in ___

A

executive compensation proposals and environ/social proposals

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

Policy behind director agenda control is that SHs can __

A

exit if they don’t like something

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

Under the new Unocal, the BOD has broad discretion over most decisions but not so much with ___

A

SH voting

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

Interfering with SH voting is frowned upon because it ___

A

changes allocation of power between BOD and SHs

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

Unocal is no longer exclusively tied to __

A

takeover threats

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

Under the new Unocal it can also be used to asses the legality of __

A

interfering with SH enterprises

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

New Unocal cases

A
  • Blasius
  • Schnell
  • Coster
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
23
Q

Under the new Unocal saying price is too low is not __

A

forever defense for keeping pill in place

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
24
Q

Williams says that 5% trigger for a pill ___

A

is no-start, SH activism

25
Williams altered proportionality by moving towards ___ as crucial factor even if defense measures not __
range of reasonableness, preclusive/coercive
26
Williams rejected idea that directors could justify actions by claiming ___
knew better than SH about board composition
27
Williams decision is a substantial shift away from __
concept of substantive coercion
28
Blasius required that directors provide ___
compelling justificatio nfor defensive tactics when primarily interfering with SH
29
Coster impact on Unocal
folded Blasius standard (compelling justification) into Unocal analysis
30
Schnell key facts
BOD invoked new provision to move annual meeting to thwart proxy fight
31
Schnell rule is that directors may not act with ___
sole purpose of obstructing SH action even if methods legally permissible
32
DGCL 211 says that directors determine ___
when and where to hold annual meeting
33
Schnell held that directors may not take steps designed to ___ even if ___
perpetuate power at SH expense, permitted by statute
34
Schnell held that ___ are particularly important
SH elections
35
In Schnell, changing the date was inequitable because __
in effect total obstruction of dissident SH efforts
36
Unocal standard vs. Blasius standard
reasonably perceived threat vs. compelling justification
37
Blasius (Atlas SH) proposed that Atlas __
sell assets and distribute large one-time dividend
38
Atlas directors thought __
Blasius plan would genuinely harm corporation
39
When Atlas BOD expressed didn't like Blasius proposal, Blasius ___
formalized proposal + requested election 8 new BOD
40
In response to Blasius BOD election proposal, Atlas BOD __
amended bylaws to add two more BOD
41
Blasius held that BOD cannot take action with ___
primary purpose of interfering with SH even if good faith pursuit of corporate interest
42
Atlas decision to expand BOD was statutorily allowed but inequitable because __
express motive to prevent Blasius from getting control of BOD in immediate future
43
What should Atlas BOD done instead?
use corporate $ to educate SH on Blasius negative effects
44
Coster was mad because the UIP BOD responded by __
issuing stock to long-time employee diluting Coster's ownership
45
Coster held that entire fairness was ___
insufficient given large interference with Coster voting rights as half owner
46
Coster holds that Unocal is __
applicable because response to a threat
47
What was the threat in Coster?
Custodian would give rise to termination rights in Ks and threaten revenue stream
48
Coster held that UIP board did not act inequitably because it ___
had compelling justification
49
What were the reasons for compelling justification in Coster
- issue stock cemented relationship with critical employee - custodian would threaten revenue and Ks
50
What was Williams ground for 5% pill?
generalized concern about stockholder activism in market uncertainty
51
The pill in WIlliams was designed to deal with ___ NOT ___
stockholder activism, takeover threat
52
What was WIlliams BOD concern about SH activism?
SHs would pursue short-term agendas without caring about long-term company health
53
Trinity v. Walmart proposal rejected was that Walmart ___
adopt policy not to sell guns with high capacity magazines
54
A company can generally exclude SH proposal if relates to ___
ordinary business operations
55
Trinity case held that Walmart could exclude because __
heart of retailer business to decide which products to sell
56
Trinity held that sale of high-capacity guns is ____ BUT ___
significant social policy, doesn't transcend day to day operations
57
Under 14a8 company cannot exclude proposal if its focus is a matter __
of significant social policy + goes beyond day to day business
58