This article explores the question of demand requirements in shareholder derivative litigation. It considers the United States Supreme Court's interpretation of demand requirements under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23.1. It then examines states' treatments of demand on directors and demand on other shareholders, explaining that divergent notions of the function of demand understandably affect courts' interpretation of state derivative litigation laws. The article argues that more consistent approaches to the demand requirements would better enable them to fulfill their purposes.
Deborah A. DeMott, Demand in Derivative Actions: Problems of Interpretation and Function, 19 U.C. Davis Law Review 461-495 (1986)