Shlensky was a minority shareholder of Chicago National League Ball Club, Inc., which owned and operated the Chicago Cubs baseball team. The defendants were directors of the club. Shlensky alleged that since night baseball was first played in 1935, every major league team except the Cubs has scheduled most of its home games at night. This has allegedly been done for the specific purpose of maximizing attendance, thereby maximizing revenue and income.

The Cubs have sustained losses from their direct baseball operations. Shlensky attributed the losses to inadequate attendance at the Cubs’ home games, which are played at Wrigley Field. He feels that if the directors continue to refuse to install lights at Wrigley Field and schedule night baseball games, the Cubs will continue to sustain similar losses.

Shlensky further alleged that Philip Wrigley, the president of the corporation, refused to install lights not, as Wrigley claims, for the welfare of the corporation, but because of his personal opinion that “baseball is a daytime sport.” Shlensky charged the other directors with acquiescing in Wrigley’s policy. In his complaint, Shlensky claimed that the directors were acting for reasons contrary to the business interests of the corporation and wasting corporate assets. Have the directors failed to exercise reasonable care in the management of the corporation’s affairs? Does the directors’ decision fall within the scope of their business judgment? [Shlensky v. Wrigley, 237 N.E.2d 776 (Ill. App. Ct. 1968).]