White v. Panic
In White v. Panic, 783 A.2d 543, 550 n. 18 (Del. 2001), the plaintiffs alleged that the defendant board members must have known about an employee's misconduct because they agreed to settle eight harassment suits brought against the employee and the company.
The court held, however, that the plaintiff failed to allege that the challenged settlements were anything other than routine business decisions in the interest of the corporation. White, 783 A.2d at 553.
While the directors were aware of the suits and the resulting settlements, "this fact does not indicate that the directors knew that the suits were meritorious." White, 783 A.2d at 553 n.31.