Question

The Chicago National League Ball Club (Chicago Cubs) operated Wrigley Field, the Cubs’s home park. Through the 1965 baseball season, the Cubs were the only major league baseball team that played no home games at night because Wrigley Field had no lights for nighttime baseball. Philip K. Wrigley, director and president of the corporation, refused to install lights because of his personal opinion that baseball was a daytime sport and that installing lights and scheduling night baseball games would result in the deterioration of the surrounding neighborhood. The other directors assented to this policy. From 1961 to 1965, the Cubs suffered losses from their baseball operations. The Chicago White Sox, whose weekday games were gen- erally played at night, drew many more fans than did the Cubs. A shareholder sued the board of directors to force them to install lights at Wrigley Field and to schedule night games. What did the court rule? Why? Business judgement rule g

Answer 1

Answer:

The court held that the Cubs were not required to "follow the crowd° by having night games like other baseball clubs. The judgment of the executives of an organization appreciates the advantage of an assumption that it was shaped in accordance with some basic honesty and was intended to advance the eventual benefits of the partnership. The court accepted that the chiefs acted to the greatest advantage of the partnership. The court was intrigued that the since quite a while ago run interests of the Cubs would be served by saving the encompassing neighborhood, which would make Wrigley Field increasingly lovely for supporters and keep up the estimation of Wrigley Field.  

Note that the Cubs, under various possession today, have placed lights in Wrigley Field and are playing night games. The Cubs method of reasoning for needing lights is that without lights games must be played during hot days in July and August (making the players tire quicker during the long season) and that with lights more fans who work will come to games. Furthermore, without lights the Cubs' home season finisher and World Series games that TV contracts direct will be played around evening time would need to be played away from Wrigley Field. Ask your understudies whether an investor who sues to constrain the Cubs to expel the lights would be fruitful or whether the business judgment rule would secure administration. The appropriate response is that the business judgment rule ensures Cubs' administration. This shows how defensive the business judgment rule is, on the grounds that it secures executives whether they choose to have lights or not to have lights at Wrigley Field. Shlensky v. Wrigley, 237 N.E.2d 776 (III. Application. 1968).