Source: http://clsbluesky.law.columbia.edu/author/eric-a-chiappinelli/
Timestamp: 2019-04-23 06:12:40+00:00

Document:
On February 25, the Supreme Court unanimously decided Walden v. Fiore, a case with significant implications for Delaware’s officer and director consent statute, § 3114. I recently argued that § 3114 is unconstitutional, especially in light of the Court’s 2011 opinions in Nicastro. Walden makes even more clear that § 3114 violates the Due Process Clause.
In an article just published in the Delaware Journal of Corporate Law, I argue that Delaware’s implied-consent-to-jurisdiction statute is unconstitutional. That statute, Section 3114, is routinely invoked to assert personal jurisdiction over virtually every nonresident director and officer defendant in shareholder litigation. The Supreme Court’s decision in J. McIntyre Machinery, Ltd. v. Nicastro underscores Section 3114’s constitutional problems, which were plain in 1977 when Delaware adopted it in the wake of Shaffer v. Heitner.
Editor's Tweet: Professor Eric Chiappinelli of Texas Tech University School of Law discusses "The Myth of Director Consent: After Shaffer, Beyond Nicastro"

References: v. 
 § 3114
 § 3114
 § 3114
 v. 
 v.