Milbank’s post: “Activist Settlements: Fiduciary Questions for Boards” discusses the scarcely resourced topic of directors’ fiduciary duties in considering a settlement with an activist that encompasses appointment of one or more activist nominees to the board in the context of the Delaware Supreme Court’s two-pronged Unocal standard. The Unocal test requires that the board demonstrate: i) it had reasonable grounds for believing that a danger to corporate policy and effectiveness existed, and (ii) its action or response was reasonable in relation to the threat. The illuminating piece breaks down the analysis into logical pieces illustrated by hypothetical examples.