One of the most influential cases in corporate governance is In re Caremark International Inc. Derivative Litigation (Caremark). In 1996, Caremark imposed a novel duty on boards of directors to make a good faith attempt to implement and exercise oversight over obligations leading to liability. Breach of this minimal duty has been difficult for plaintiffs to plead and prove, and the case law is littered with dismissed Caremark lawsuits. As Caremark's reign reaches a quarter‐century, however, its duties are primed to evolve. Two cases, Marchand v. Barnhill and In re Clovis Oncology, Inc. Derivative Litigation, took the rare step of allowing Caremark claims to survive motions to dismiss. These cases signal a new understanding of Caremark obligating boards not merely to attempt oversight, but to ensure proactively that such oversight is effective. This subtle but significant change in board duties is one to which the academic literature should respond. This article first reviews the Marchand and Clovis cases and argues that these cases hold significance for the future of Caremark claims. Second, this article studies client advisories from law firms and other sources that evaluate the Clovis and Marchand cases. It finds that while these advisories offer useful tactical responses, they lack strategic advice that would benefit boards over the long term. Filling the gap, this article presents long‐term strategic advice for boards not only to meet Caremark duties but also to thrive as exemplars of good governance and ethical leadership for the next twenty‐five years.

中文翻译：

---

未来二十五年符合Caremark的要求

公司治理方面最具影响力的案例之一是In re Caremark International Inc.衍生诉讼（ Caremark ）。1996年， Caremark对董事会施加了新的职责，即真诚地尝试执行和监督导致责任的义务。对于原告来说，难以履行这一最低职责是很困难的，而且判例法中充斥着被驳回的Caremark诉讼。但是，随着Caremark的统治持续了25年，其职责已准备就绪。Marchand诉Barnhill案和In re Clovis Oncology，Inc.衍生诉讼案这两个案件采取了罕见的允许Caremark声称可以保留驳回的动议。这些案例标志着对Caremark义务委员会的新认识，不仅是试图进行监督，而且是积极地确保这种监督是有效的。董事会职责的这种微妙而重要的变化是学术文献应对此做出的回应。本文首先回顾了Marchand和Clovis案件，并认为这些案件对于Caremark索赔的未来具有重要意义。其次，本文研究了来自律师事务所和其他评估Clovis和Marchand的资料来源的客户咨询案件。报告发现，尽管这些咨询提供了有用的战术响应，但它们缺乏长期有益于董事会的战略建议。填补空白，本文为董事会提出了长期战略建议，不仅要履行Caremark的职责，而且要成为未来25年良好治理和道德领导力的典范。