IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/osf/lawarc/7eu4b_v1.html

Get Back: The Delaware Supreme Court Discourages Appraisal Arbitrage in DFC Global Corporation v. Muirfield Value Partners, L.P

Author

Listed:
  • Schneider, Abraham

Abstract

This Casebrief examines the Delaware Supreme Court’s decision in DFC Global Corp. v. Muirfield Value Partners, L.P. and argues that the court appropriately curtailed appraisal arbitrage in clean mergers while preserving judicial discretion to protect minority shareholders in conflicted transactions. Rejecting a formal presumption that merger price equals fair value, the court nevertheless held that substantial weight should be given to the deal price when a company is sold through a robust, arm’s-length market process. The Casebrief contends that this approach aligns with recent legislative efforts to discourage appraisal arbitrage, reduces incentives for speculative appraisal litigation, and preserves appraisal rights where minority shareholder exploitation remains a concern. [This abstract was written by Microsoft Copilot, a generative artificial intelligence.]

Suggested Citation

  • Schneider, Abraham, 2026. "Get Back: The Delaware Supreme Court Discourages Appraisal Arbitrage in DFC Global Corporation v. Muirfield Value Partners, L.P," LawArchive 7eu4b_v1, Center for Open Science.
  • Handle: RePEc:osf:lawarc:7eu4b_v1
    DOI: 10.31228/osf.io/7eu4b_v1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://osf.io/download/6abab460897b1f93b7d0eb74/
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.31228/osf.io/7eu4b_v1?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:osf:lawarc:7eu4b_v1. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: OSF (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://lawarchive.info/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.