119 Ohio App. 3d 19 - Drage v. Procter & Gamble’s Empirical Analysis
1997
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 11 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 29 later decisions — most recently October 2022 · most notably Karcich v. Stuart (2000), Auletta v. Ortino (2008)
2 federal appellate · 11 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Relies on O'Brien v. University Community Tenants Union, Inc. · Aronson v. Lewis · Belvedere Condominium Unit Owners' Ass'n v. R.E. Roark Companies, Inc. · 94 Ohio App. 3d 579 - Koos v. Central Ohio Cellular, Inc. · Polikoff v. Adam
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 29 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Certainly, a provision prohibiting directors from bringing suits against each other would deprive the directors of the ability to exercise independent judgment as to the advisability of instituting action against any officer or director for mismanagement, and thereby [divest them] of the power to govern this aspect of the corporation’s affairs.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“may make a demand on the directors to bring a suit on behalf of the corporation, but no shareholder has an independent right to bring suit unless the board refuses to do so and that refusal is wrongful, fraudulent or arbitrary, or is the result of bad faith or bias on the part of the directors.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“that directors can make an unbiased, independent business judgment about whether it would be in the corporation's best interests to sue some or all of the other directors. Thus, courts have consistently rejected the idea that demand is always futile when the directors are targeted as the wrongdoers in the suit the shareholders wish the corporation to bring.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.