Igt

Lawrence Arduini v. Igt

Good Law
774 F.3d 622·2014 WL 7156764·2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 23783
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 17, 201412-15750California7,223 words

Opinion

Opinion

Callahan, J.

Shareholders are required to make a “demand” on the corporation’s board of directors before filing a derivative suit, unless they sufficiently allege that demand would be futile because the board would not act on the demand. Here, before Plaintiff Lawrence Arduini (“Arduini”) filed his derivative action against 'International Gaming Technology (“IGT”) and its board of directors, four shareholders filed separate derivative suits that were subsequently consolidated. The district court then dismissed the consolidated suit for failure to make a demand on the corporation’s board or sufficiently allege demand futility, and on appeal, we affirmed that dismissal. The district court then dismissed Arduini’s action, holding that Ar-duini had failed to make' a demand on the IGT board and could not allege demand futility based on issue preclusion due to its ruling in the prior derivative suit. We hold that under Nevada law and the facts of this case, the district court properly held that issue preclusion barred relitigation of demand futility, and we affirm.

I

Defendant-Appellee International Game Technology (“IGT”) is a Nevada corporation that makes and services electronic gaming…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.