Opinion ID: 2180171
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 7

Heading: VantagePoint's Argument

Text: According to VantagePoint, the issue presented by this case is not a choice of law question, but rather the constitutional issue of whether California may promulgate a narrowly-tailored exception to the internal affairs doctrine that is designed to protect important state interests. VantagePoint submits that Section 2115 was designed to provide an additional layer of investor protection by mandating that California's heightened voting requirements apply to those few foreign corporations that have chosen to conduct a majority of their business in California and meet the other factual prerequisite of Section 2115. Therefore, VantagePoint argues that Delaware either must apply the statute if California can validly enact it, or hold the statute unconstitutional if California cannot. We note, however, that when an issue or claim is properly before a tribunal, the court is not limited to the particular legal theories advanced by the parties, but rather retains the independent power to identify and apply the proper construction of governing law. [3]