- "Foot-Fault" Suits: Enterprising plaintiffs have seen success targeting companies which do not follow proper governance processes and procedures in setting compensation for non-executive directors.
- Say on Pay Suits: Plaintiffs allege that poor say on pay results demonstrate that the board's decision to approve a company’s compensation package was unreasonable and not protected by the business judgment rule.
- 162(m) Suits: Plaintiffs claim that incentive compensation plans are noncompliant with Section 162(m) of the Internal Revenue Code or a company policy favoring incentive compensation deductibility.
- Executive Pay “Strike” Suits: Plaintiffs seek an injunction to delay a company’s annual meeting shortly after its proxy is filed and shortly before the meeting on the basis that proxy disclosure is inadequate under state corporate law in an attempt to force a settlement.
While very few of the inital variations of these suits saw success, recently plaintiffs have been successful in targeting administrative and compliance shortcomings in the process by which companies set director pay or ask for 162(m) approval.