For the purposes of this subchapter, the term "derivative proceeding" means a civil action in the right of a domestic nonprofit corporation or, to the extent provided in § 29-411.08, in the right of a foreign nonprofit corporation.
(July 2, 2011, D.C. Law 18-378, § 2, 58 DCR 1720.)
HISTORICAL AND STATUTORY NOTES
Legislative History of Laws
For history of Law 18-378, see notes under § 29-101.01.
(a) A derivative proceeding may be brought in the Superior Court by:
(1) A member or members having 5% or more of the voting power, or by 50 members, whichever is less; or
(2) Any director or member of a designated body.
(b) The plaintiff in a derivative proceeding shall be a member, director, or member of a designated body at the time of bringing the proceeding. A plaintiff that is a member shall also have been a member at the time of any action complained of in the derivative proceeding.
(July 2, 2011, D.C. Law 18-378, § 2, 58 DCR 1720.)
HISTORICAL AND STATUTORY NOTES
Legislative History of Laws
For history of Law 18-378, see notes under § 29-101.01.
A person shall not commence a derivative proceeding until:
(1) A demand in the form of a record has been delivered to the nonprofit corporation to take suitable action; and
(2) Ninety days have expired from the date the demand was effective unless:
(A) The person has earlier been notified that the demand has been rejected by the corporation; or
(B) Irreparable injury to the corporation would result by waiting for the expiration of the 90-day period.
(July 2, 2011, D.C. Law 18-378, § 2, 58 DCR 1720.)
HISTORICAL AND STATUTORY NOTES
Legislative History of Laws
For history of Law 18-378, see notes under § 29-101.01.
If the nonprofit corporation commences an inquiry into the allegations made in the demand or complaint, the Superior Court may stay any derivative proceeding for such period as the court considers appropriate.
(July 2, 2011, D.C. Law 18-378, § 2, 58 DCR 1720.)
HISTORICAL AND STATUTORY NOTES
Legislative History of Laws
For history of Law 18-378, see notes under § 29-101.01.
(a) The Superior Court shall dismiss a derivative proceeding on motion by the nonprofit corporation if one of the groups specified in subsection (b) or (e) of this section has determined in good faith after conducting a reasonable inquiry upon which its conclusions are based that the maintenance of the derivative proceeding is not in the best interests of the corporation.
(b) Unless a panel is appointed pursuant to subsection (e) of this section, the determination in subsection (a) of this section shall be made by a majority vote of:
(1) Independent directors present at a meeting of the board of directors if the independent directors constitute a quorum; or
(2) A committee consisting of 2 or more independent directors appointed by majority vote of independent directors present at a meeting of the board of directors, whether or not such independent directors constituted a quorum.
(c) If a derivative proceeding is commenced after a determination has been made rejecting a demand by a member, the complaint shall allege with particularity facts establishing that:
(1) A majority of the board of directors did not consist of independent directors at the time the determination was made; or
(2) The requirements of subsection (a) of this section have not been met.
(d) If a majority of the board of directors does not consist of independent directors at the time the determination is made, the nonprofit corporation shall have the burden of proving that the requirements of subsection (a) of this section have been met. If a majority of the board of directors consists of independent directors at the time the determination is made, the plaintiff shall have the burden of proving that the requirements of subsection (a) of this section have not been met.
(e) The Superior Court may appoint a panel of one or more independent persons upon motion by the nonprofit corporation to make a determination whether the maintenance of the derivative proceeding is in the best interests of the corporation. In such case, the plaintiff has the burden of proving that the requirements of subsection (a) of this section have not been met.
(f) A person is independent for purposes of this section if the person does not have:
(1) A material interest in the outcome of the proceeding; or
(2) A material relationship with a person that has such an interest.
(g) None of the following by itself causes a director to be considered not independent for purposes of this section:
(1) The nomination, election, or appointment of the director by persons that are defendants in the derivative proceeding or against whom action is demanded;
(2) The naming of the director as a defendant in the derivative proceeding or as a person against whom action is demanded; or
(3) The approval by the director of the act being challenged in the derivative proceeding or demand if the act resulted in no personal benefit to the director.
(July 2, 2011, D.C. Law 18-378, § 2, 58 DCR 1720.)
HISTORICAL AND STATUTORY NOTES
Legislative History of Laws
For history of Law 18-378, see notes under § 29-101.01.
A derivative proceeding shall not be discontinued or settled without the Superior Court's approval. If the court determines that a proposed discontinuance or settlement will substantially affect the interests of the members or a class of members of the nonprofit corporation, the court shall direct that notice be given to the members affected.
(July 2, 2011, D.C. Law 18-378, § 2, 58 DCR 1720.)
HISTORICAL AND STATUTORY NOTES
Legislative History of Laws
For history of Law 18-378, see notes under § 29-101.01.
(a) In any derivative proceeding brought under § 29-411.02(a), the nonprofit corporation shall be entitled at any stage of the proceeding to seek an order requiring the plaintiffs to give security for reasonable expenses, including attorney fees and expenses, that may be incurred by the corporation in connection with the proceeding, to which security the corporation may have recourse in such amount as the Superior Court determines upon termination of the proceeding. The amount of security may be increased or decreased in the discretion of the court upon a showing that the security provided has or may become inadequate or excessive. Security may be denied or limited in the discretion of the court upon a preliminary showing, by application and upon such types of proof as may be required by the court, establishing prima facie that the requirement of full or partial security would impose undue hardship on plaintiffs and serious injustice would result.
(b) On termination of the derivative proceeding the Superior Court may order:
(1) The nonprofit corporation to pay the plaintiff's reasonable expenses, including attorneys' fees, incurred in the proceeding if it finds that the proceeding has resulted in a substantial benefit to the corporation;
(2) The plaintiff to pay any defendant's reasonable expenses, including attorneys' fees, incurred in defending the proceeding if it finds that the proceeding was commenced or maintained without reasonable cause or for an improper purpose; or
(3) A party to pay an opposing party's reasonable expenses, including attorneys' fees, incurred because of the filing of a pleading, motion, or other paper, if it finds that the pleading, motion, or other paper was not well grounded in fact, after reasonable inquiry, or warranted by existing law or a good faith argument for the extension, modification, or reversal of existing law and was interposed for an improper purpose, such as to harass or cause unnecessary delay or needless increase in the cost of litigation.
(July 2, 2011, D.C. Law 18-378, § 2, 58 DCR 1720.)
HISTORICAL AND STATUTORY NOTES
Legislative History of Laws
For history of Law 18-378, see notes under § 29-101.01.
In any derivative proceeding in the right of a foreign nonprofit corporation, the matters covered by this subchapter shall be governed by the laws of the jurisdiction of incorporation of the foreign corporation, except for §§ 29- 411.04, 29-411.06, and 29-411.07.
(July 2, 2011, D.C. Law 18-378, § 2, 58 DCR 1720.)
HISTORICAL AND STATUTORY NOTES
Legislative History of Laws
For history of Law 18-378, see notes under § 29-101.01.
The plaintiff in a derivative proceeding shall notify the Attorney General for the District of Columbia within 10 days after commencing the proceeding if it involves a charitable corporation.
(July 2, 2011, D.C. Law 18-378, § 2, 58 DCR 1720.)
HISTORICAL AND STATUTORY NOTES
Legislative History of Laws
For history of Law 18-378, see notes under § 29-101.01.
