In Schoon v. Smith, C.A. No. 1753-N (Del. Ch. Sept. 7, 2006), the Delaware Court of Chancery rejected an attempt by a director to pursue, in his capacity as such, a derivative action on behalf of the corporation he served. The substantive portion of the two-page letter opinion stated, in its entirety, as follows:

I have reviewed the briefs filed in connection with the motion to dismiss and conclude that today’s scheduled oral argument would not be helpful to the resolution of the issues raised. Instead, it appears that the issue of Mr. Schoon’s standing to maintain this litigation solely in his capacity as a director is controlled by well settled authority. As explained in Moran v. Household International, Inc., 490 A.2d 1059, 1071 (Del. Ch. 1985), aff’d, 500 A.2d 1346 (Del. 1985), Delaware law does not recognize the right of a director, acting in that capacity, to sue on behalf of the corporation he or she serves or on behalf of its stockholders. Moreover, I decline the plaintiff ’s invitation to revisit this issue. There are powerful policy interests embodied in both Section 372 of the Delaware General Corporation Law and Court of Chancery Rule 23.1 that militate against recognizing the standing of an individual director to bring such litigation. Any decision to alter those arrangements is properly left to the collective judgment of the General Assembly.