ORDER DISMISSING ACTION
This action is derivative. It seeks to pursue claims for the misappropriation of corporate assets. Those claims belong to the corporation. Any remedy would presumptively go to the corporation, subject to this court's power in equity to award an investor-level remedy. By rule, “[a] derivative plaintiff must be represented by counsel.” Ct. Ch. R. 23.1(c)(2). The plaintiff has sued pro se, warranting dismissal. Recognizing that the plaintiff may retain counsel, this order of dismissal will become effective on September 30, 2025, if no counsel enters an appearance for plaintiff on or before that date. If no one appears, then the dismissal is without prejudice. If counsel appears for plaintiff, counsel may move to vacate this order. At that point, the court will proceed to consider the defendant's other arguments. The defendant may wish to consider whether some should be advanced. For example, it should be obvious that demand is futile when a corporation is void and therefore lacks a board of directors who could consider a demand. dismissal will become effective on September 30, 2025, if no counsel enters an appearance for plaintiff on or before that date. If no one appears, then the dismissal is without prejudice. If counsel appears for plaintiff, counsel may move to vacate this order. At that point, the court will proceed to consider the defendant's other arguments. The defendant may wish to consider whether some should be advanced. For example, it should be obvious that demand is futile when a corporation is void and therefore lacks a board of directors who could consider a demand. If counsel appears for the plaintiff, then counsel should give consideration to to seeking to have a receiver appointed for the purpose of pursuing the corporation's putative claims against the allegedly faithless fiduciaries
This action is derivative. It seeks to pursue claims for the misappropriation of corporate assets. Those claims belong to the corporation. Any remedy would presumptively go to the corporation, subject to this court's power in equity to award an investor-level remedy. By rule, “[a] derivative plaintiff must be represented by counsel.” Ct. Ch. R. 23.1(c)(2). The plaintiff has sued pro se, warranting dismissal. Recognizing that the plaintiff may retain counsel, this order of dismissal will become effective on September 30, 2025, if no counsel enters an appearance for plaintiff on or before that date. If no one appears, then the dismissal is without prejudice. If counsel appears for plaintiff, counsel may move to vacate this order. At that point, the court will proceed to consider the defendant's other arguments. The defendant may wish to consider whether some should be advanced. For example, it should be obvious that demand is futile when a corporation is void and therefore lacks a board of directors who could consider a demand. dismissal will become effective on September 30, 2025, if no counsel enters an appearance for plaintiff on or before that date. If no one appears, then the dismissal is without prejudice. If counsel appears for plaintiff, counsel may move to vacate this order. At that point, the court will proceed to consider the defendant's other arguments. The defendant may wish to consider whether some should be advanced. For example, it should be obvious that demand is futile when a corporation is void and therefore lacks a board of directors who could consider a demand. If counsel appears for the plaintiff, then counsel should give consideration to to seeking to have a receiver appointed for the purpose of pursuing the corporation's putative claims against the allegedly faithless fiduciaries
2
