This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

See IN RE TYSON FOODS, INC. CONSOLIDATED SHAREHOLDER LITIGATION 919 A.2d 563 (Del.Ch. 2007). Ds maintain that the challenged stock options were, in fact, “non-qualified stock options” under Tyson’s Stock Incentive Plan and move for judgment on the pleadings as to Count III. Under the spring-loaded option prima face case, a plaintiff must allege that options were issued according to a shareholder-approved employee compensation plan. Second, a plaintiff must allege that the directors that approved spring-loaded (or bullet-dodging) options (a) possessed material non-public information soon to be released that would impact the company’s share price, and (b) issued those options with the intent to circumvent otherwise valid shareholder-approved restrictions upon the exercise price of the options.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.