<story><title>Sergey Aleynikov Loses in Goldman Fight Over Fees</title><url>http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-09-03/ex-goldman-programmer-s-legal-fee-advance-rejected.html</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>rayiner</author><text>The Delaware law provisions in question exist because the officers and directors of a corporation are often sued for the alleged misconduct of the corporation itself, and it&amp;#x27;s reasonable in those circumstances for the corporation to pay for their defense.&lt;p&gt;A VP at Goldman is, I think, the third lowest ranking front-office position. Not only is it not the sort of &amp;quot;officer&amp;quot; that Delaware law contemplates, but it&amp;#x27;s also not the sort of context Delaware law contemplates. Aleynikov wasn&amp;#x27;t accused of wrongdoing in his official capacity as an officer of the corporation. That might be something like a CEO being accused of funneling contracts to his brother&amp;#x27;s company. Aleynikov was accused of wrongdoing that was incidental to his employment.</text></comment>
<story><title>Sergey Aleynikov Loses in Goldman Fight Over Fees</title><url>http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-09-03/ex-goldman-programmer-s-legal-fee-advance-rejected.html</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>spindritf</author><text>They&amp;#x27;re all vice presidents there? American Psycho is becoming truer every day.&lt;p&gt;&lt;i&gt;the ruling gives Goldman an incentive to keep the ambiguous language in place so it can reserve the right to make “unpredictable post hoc determinations about which former employees should be advanced attorney’s fees and which shouldn’t,” Fuentes wrote.&lt;/i&gt;&lt;p&gt;Maybe there&amp;#x27;s some selection bias going, or I&amp;#x27;m a contrarian, but somehow dissents usually make more sense than rulings.</text></comment>