Del. C. » Title 6 — SUBTITLE II · Commerce and Trade · Subchapter X. Derivative Actions
Delaware Code

6 Del. C. § 17-1003 (2026)

Complaint

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section DE-DELCdelcode.delaware.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

In a derivative action, the complaint shall set forth with particularity the effort, if any, of the plaintiff to secure initiation of the action by a general partner or the reasons for not making the effort.

6 Del. C. 1953, §  1732;  59 Del. Laws, c. 105, §  1;  63 Del. Laws, c. 420, §  1;  65 Del. Laws, c. 188, §  1; 
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 7 cases (4 in the last 5 years), 2016–2026 · leading case: Brinckerhoff v. Enbridge Energy Co., Inc. (Del. Ch. 2016).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Brinckerhoff v. Enbridge Energy Co., Inc. (Del. Ch. 2016). · cites it 2× “51 6 Del. C. § 17-1003. See also Brehm v. Eisner, 746 A.”
David C. Fannin v. UMTH Land Dev., L.P. (Del. Ch. 2020). “” 6 Del. C. § 17-1003. “Delaware courts look to pleading standards developed in the corporate context to determine whether a 255 Entity Defs.”
Jeff Lipman v. GPB Capital Holdings LLC (Del. Ch. 2020). “81 6 Del. C. § 17-1003. 18 burden. There are differences in the application of the two demand requirements, however, as I address below.”
Kimberly Hutcherson & Stephen Hutcherson v. Villas at Bay Crossing (Del. Ch. 2025). “1; then citing 6 Del. C. § 17-1003; then citing 6 Del. C.”
Kissman, et.al. v. Ohno (D.V.I. 2025). “) Pursuant to 6 Del. C. § 17-1003, “[i]n a derivative action, the complaint shall set forth with particularity the effIonr rt,e i fC aongyn, iozfa tnhte T pelcahin.”
Young Women's Christian Ass'n of Rochester & Monroe Cnty. v. Hatteras Funds, LP (Del. Ch. 2026). “68 6 Del. C. § 17-1003; accord Ct. Ch. R. 23.”
Meyer v. Hatteras Inv. Partners, L.P., 2025 NCBC 62 (N.C. Bus. Ct. 2025). “” 6 Del. C. § 17-1003. 41. A complaint properly alleges demand futility if it sets forth particularized facts that enable the Court to affirmatively answer any of the three following questions: (i) whether the [general partner] received a material personal benefit from the…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.