Cottrell v. Duke et al

Filing 139

JUDGMENT granting 109 Defendants' Motion to Dismiss Case for Failure to Establish Demand Futility. Plaintiffs' claims against Defendants are dismissed with prejudice. Signed by Honorable Susan O. Hickey on April 7, 2015. (mll)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
TEXARKANA DIVISION
____________________________________
)
IN RE WAL-MART STORES, INC.
)
SHAREHOLDER DERIVATIVE
)
LITIGATION
)
____________________________________)
)
This Document Relates to:
)
ALL ACTIONS
)
____________________________________)

Master Docket No. 4:12-cv-4041

JUDGMENT
Before the Court is a Motion to Dismiss Case for Failure to Establish Demand Futility
filed by Nominal Defendant Wal-Mart and the Individual Defendants. 1 ECF No. 109. Plaintiffs
have filed a response. ECF No. 114. Defendants 2 have filed a reply. ECF No. 115. The Court
has reviewed the memoranda and various supplements submitted by the parties. ECF Nos. 110,
116, 119, 121, 122, 124, 125, 127, 128, 129, 131, 132, 133, 134, 135, and 136. The matter is
ripe for the Court’s consideration. For the reasons set forth in the Amended Order (ECF No.
138) entered April 3, 2015, the Court finds that Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Case for Failure
to Establish Demand Futility (ECF No. 109) should be and hereby is GRANTED. Accordingly,
Plaintiffs’ claims against Defendants are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.
IT IS SO ORDERED, this 7th day of April, 2015.

/s/ Susan O. Hickey
Susan O. Hickey
United States District Judge

1
2

The term “Individual Defendants” refers to all persons named as defendants in this action.
The “Defendants” collectively refers to Nominal Defendant Wal-Mart and the Individual Defendants.