Examining the Actions of Organizations in Conflict: Evidence From the Delaware Court of Chancery

Abstract

We use the interpersonal dispute resolution literature to develop hypotheses regarding how organizations respond to adjudicated conflicts. Our hypotheses were tested with data from disputes litigated at the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware, which has been called “the chief arbiter of right and wrong in corporate America” ). Our results underscore the important role that legal agents play in organization-level dispute resolution. We also highlight the different power bases of disputants as factors influencing favorable outcomes at the Chancery.