More CEOs are tired of Dilayer and the strong Chancery Court on Elon Musk Road, reintegrate their companies in other places and broadcast their frustration publicly.
This is the so -called “supervision” that will follow the companies led by musk (Tesla), Spacex, boring company, Neuralink, and X that left or tries to leave Delaware.
“Never integrate your company in Delaware,” Musk He said on x In January 2024, after the head of the Chancery Court, Chancellor Cathaline McCromic, canceled a shareholder vote in Tesla in 2018, approves the performance -based compensation deal worth $ 56 billion.
“I think there is a lot of pressure on Dilayer,” said Virginia University Law Faculty. Michel is prominent. “And I think the more move, the easier it becomes for others to move.”
Bill Akman, CEO of Birching Square, announced his decision on the social platform X, owned by Musk, saying he chose Nevada.
Akman wrote: “The senior law firms in Nevada and Texas on Delaware recommend.”
For almost the past century, Dilayer was the dominant place to integrate due to the so -called companies friendly and specialized businesses CourtsAnd the ease of submitting the company documents.
The state tells that it is home More than two -thirds of all Fortune 500 companies. In 2023, Dilayer reached a record number of 2 million foundations, but it witnessed a decrease in the percentage of Fortune 500 companies recorded there to 67.6 % of 68.2 % in 2022.
Dilayer achieved $ 1.33 billion in establishment revenues in 2024, or about 22 % of the total state revenue.
Places like Nevada, Texas, South Dakota, North Carolina, Washington, and Woewang, which some of these revenues want to get rid of Delaware's dominance with her business -friendly strategies.
“Dilayer is at risk of losing her position as a leading case of American companies,” Paul Ghrouwal, the chief legal official of Coinbase at X earlier this month.
These efforts took place in the past year from the richest man in the world, Musk, when Tesla shareholders voted to integrate them in Texas instead of Delaware – a step that was made to a reaction against Musk's salaries.
But even this re -establishment in the Chencery Court, in a separate case before the same judge who hated MUSK compensation. The lawsuit, filed by an investor challenging the vote, claimed that the re -establishment was designed to protect musk from the Dilayer Law.
A similar quarrel for re -establishment arose between Tripadvisor (Trip) and two of its shareholders in 2023, before Musk attempts.
in Maffei V. With a universeandThe shareholders opposed the vote for the re -establishment in Nevada, claiming that the procedure would have failed without votes from Gregory Maffei, the owner of the company that controls the company at the time.
The dispute ended last week when the Supreme Court of Dilayer, Deputy Advisor to the Chinese Court, canceled, J. Travis downloadUnanimously held that the minimum court applied the wrong criterion to assess the move recommended by the Board of Directors.
supreme court bidder With Chancery it's more strict “Entastic equity“The standard must be applied and said that the decision was subject to more lenient.”Working ruling” a base.
The last prominent departure of Dilayer is attracting attention from the newly -elected state governor, Matt Mayer, a business lawyer, launched a working group to study the installation complaints directed at the court.
“I hear something similar to a number of Dillauir and lawyers,” Mayer said in an interview with CNBC. “They feel that they are getting the same judge every time when they come to the Dillauer Business Court, and they do not feel that they are getting a fair hearing.”
An external view of the Delaware Legislative Hall, the cabetol government building. (Kent Nishimura/Getty Images) ·Kent Nishimura via Getty Images
Shawi elephantCEO and co -founder of the translation service company TranserfectHe is another executive official who transferred his company from the state and the Governor Mayer now informs that he was unfairly treated by the court.
Shawi spent years there to litigate against his co -founder and co -manager.
When the couple became blocked due to the direction of work, the court concluded that the dilemma has led to “irreplaceable damage” to the company. To address the perceived damage, the judge appointed the guardian of the court to manage the court.
Shui, claiming that the auction exceeded the court's authority: “They ran a auction and did not produce a price higher than what it already provided (the co -founder) years ago,” claiming that the auction exceeded the court's authority.
“How the judge reached this conclusion to do so, it is very suspicious, because the work was always growing in revenues, and profit, so there was no real imminent damage that required the judge to control the work.”
Ultimately, Shawi exceeded his competitors and bought half of his co -founder of the company, although after millions spent on lawyers and court fees. He since supported the Da`wah group Citizens for judicial fairness (previously Citizens on the pro -business) To push the court to more transparency and fairness.
“There is something wrong with this system,” Shawi said.
The Leonard Center includes. Williams Justice Court of Chanseri in Wilmengton, Dell. ·Associated Press
The Israeli technological investor is another executive director who transmits his companies outside the state and says he is frustrated by the Chencey Court.
He said: “I am very afraid of the Dilayer system against entrepreneurs. I think it is a systematic danger against the entire world world and the entire start world.” “You start thinking: Why should I invest in the United States? Now it is risky.
On the only director of Movado, he claims that the court allowed the investor and the contributor to the startup of the intermittent health care now, Movadado Pt Technologies, who was also a executive director of a competitive health care company, to keep a derivative demand against him.
The shareholder in Movado did not tell that he had not fully reported the contributors to material issues, including the conditions for executive compensation and conflicts of interest between executives.
He said: “You cannot get a complaint derived when the shareholder is a competitor.”
He also did not agree to inform the judge on two of the shareholders ’votes that coincide with all the procedures of the Board of Directors, including executive compensation, on the basis that the votes were the product of a” credit breach. “
He calls himself a “small player” as an investment manager for 24 American startups. However, he argues that Chancery dealt with a fate similar to that of Moussa when the court concluded that there was a credit breach despite the votes of shareholders.
“The second is a sign (credit breach), you have lost.” “Now everyone is at risk of credit breach.”
And his sister appeals their case before the Supreme Court of Dilayer. Meanwhile, he said: “All of our companies come out of Delaware.”
Alexis Kennan is a legal correspondent for the financing of Yahoo. Follow Alexis on x Alexisweed.
