You must log in or # to comment.
So you are suing … the people that partially own your company? Only in America can you sue someone without any good reason and still win by default because you have more cash on hand. Cash the defendant partially provided no less.
Presumably the “reason”/standing is that shareholders talking about climate change might reduce the company’s value hurting the other shareholders
The funny part would be that they actually might win because share value is more important than the environment.
This is due to activist investors.
That’s people who’ll buy up enough stock to be allowed at shareholders meetings and then they’ll fucking DRILL the C-suite non-stop, derailing the meetings.
It’s a good strategy, even if it forces you in bed with evil. Make the rest of the shareholders undeniably knowledgeable and then theyll have to contend with shame or don the moniker themselves. Or start demanding ethical business practices themselves, which is what the lawsuit is ultimately trying to avoid.
It’s not worth my time & effort to look into these particular investors’ true motivations, but as a rule they’re no more or less to be trusted than the C-suite itself. In almost all cases this is just a game to these people for topping off their Scrooge McDuck swimming pools.
Scum of the planet
Search “Exxon Mobil Controversies”.
Fuckers
Can we guillotine these removed yet?
