Free Word download • Edit online • Save & share with Drive • Export to PDF
A Board Resolution To Commence Litigation is a formal corporate governance document in which a company's board of directors votes to authorize the corporation to initiate legal proceedings against a named adverse party. It records the board's decision, identifies the dispute with sufficient specificity to tie the authorization to a defined claim, designates the officer empowered to instruct counsel and execute court documents, and appoints outside litigation counsel — all in a single certified instrument that can be delivered to courts, opposing counsel, and retained attorneys as proof of proper corporate authority. Unlike an officer's unilateral decision to file suit, a board resolution creates a clear, dated record that the action was approved at the governance level required by the company's bylaws and applicable corporate statute.
Without a board resolution, a corporation's authority to maintain a lawsuit can be challenged at any stage of the proceedings — including after significant legal fees have been spent. Courts in the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom, and across the EU routinely require corporations to prove that their litigation was authorized by the board before granting substantive relief. Outside counsel will typically decline to open a file or make a filing on the company's behalf until they have a certified copy in hand. Beyond satisfying procedural requirements, the resolution also triggers the company's evidence-preservation obligations by formalizing the moment litigation became reasonably anticipated — establishing the litigation hold date that courts examine if spoliation is later alleged. For a document that takes under an hour to complete, the cost of omitting it is disproportionately high: standing challenges, sanctions exposure, and an unauthorized officer acting without a clear chain of command. This template gives you the structure to adopt a properly worded resolution before counsel files the first pleading.
| If your situation is… | Use this template |
|---|---|
| Authorizing litigation by written consent rather than a formal meeting | Written Consent of Board of Directors in Lieu of Meeting |
| Approving settlement of an existing lawsuit rather than commencing one | Board Resolution To Settle Litigation |
| Authorizing the company to defend against an incoming lawsuit | Board Resolution To Defend Litigation |
| Authorizing a specific officer to sign all legal documents generally | Board Resolution Granting Signatory Authority |
| Appointing outside legal counsel for general corporate matters | Board Resolution Appointing Legal Counsel |
| Authorizing arbitration proceedings instead of court litigation | Board Resolution To Commence Arbitration |
| Recording all board decisions made at a regular board meeting | Board Meeting Minutes |
Why it matters: A resolution identifying 'Acme Solutions' instead of 'Acme Solutions, Inc.' creates a standing question — the named entity may not be the party with rights to sue. Courts and opposing counsel routinely challenge authority on this basis.
Fix: Pull a current certificate of good standing from the state or provincial corporate registry and copy the legal name exactly as it appears.
Why it matters: Litigation hold obligations arise the moment a lawsuit is reasonably anticipated — which is when the board votes to sue. Delay in issuing a hold exposes the company to spoliation sanctions, including adverse inference instructions at trial.
Fix: Add an explicit hold clause to every litigation resolution and issue the hold notice to relevant employees on the same day the resolution is adopted.
Why it matters: If officers already sent demand letters or engaged preliminary counsel before board authorization, those acts may be characterized as unauthorized. Opposing counsel can use this to challenge the company's litigation posture or seek sanctions.
Fix: Include a ratification clause covering all steps taken before formal board action, referencing each prior action specifically — demand letters by date, preliminary counsel by firm name.
Why it matters: A resolution adopted by fewer directors than required by the bylaws is voidable and may be challenged by opposing counsel, shareholders, or the court as unauthorized corporate action.
Fix: Confirm the quorum requirement in the company's bylaws before calling the meeting. If not all directors can attend, use a written consent procedure if permitted — but only with the required level of director approval.
Why it matters: Open-ended fee authorization removes all board oversight from what can become a seven-figure cost center. Shareholders or audit committees may later challenge spending that was never capped or reviewed.
Fix: Set a specific dollar threshold — e.g., up to $50,000 without further approval — and require the authorized officer to return to the board for additional authorization if costs exceed that amount.
Why it matters: A resolution attached as a public exhibit discloses the board's internal deliberations, damages estimates, and litigation strategy. This can waive privilege and hand the adverse party a roadmap to your case.
Fix: Let litigation counsel decide whether and in what form to reference the resolution in court filings. The certified copy should go to counsel only — not be incorporated into public pleadings without legal advice.
In plain language: Identifies the corporation by its full legal name, state or province of incorporation, and the date and nature of the board action — whether a meeting or written consent.
RESOLUTIONS OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF [COMPANY LEGAL NAME], a [STATE] [ENTITY TYPE], adopted at a [special / regular] meeting held on [DATE] [or by written consent in lieu of a meeting dated [DATE]].
Common mistake: Using a trade name or DBA instead of the registered legal entity name. Courts and opposing counsel require the precise corporate name; a mismatch can delay filing or create standing challenges.
In plain language: Summarizes the factual background — the nature of the dispute, the identity of the adverse party, the harm suffered, and why litigation is the appropriate remedy.
WHEREAS, [COMPANY NAME] has suffered damages arising from [DESCRIBE DISPUTE — e.g., the material breach of the Supply Agreement dated [DATE] by [ADVERSE PARTY NAME]], including losses estimated at no less than $[AMOUNT]; and WHEREAS, the Board has determined that commencing litigation is in the best interests of the Company and its shareholders.
Common mistake: Writing vague recitals such as 'a dispute exists with a third party.' Specific recitals tie the authorization to a defined claim; vague ones give officers ambiguous authority that outside counsel may refuse to act on.
In plain language: The operative clause where the board formally resolves to authorize the company to initiate legal proceedings against the named adverse party in the appropriate forum.
RESOLVED, that the Company is hereby authorized and directed to commence legal proceedings against [ADVERSE PARTY NAME] in connection with [BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF CLAIM], in the [COURT / JURISDICTION], or such other forum as counsel may advise.
Common mistake: Omitting the specific court or jurisdiction and leaving counsel with no guidance. While counsel may choose the forum, the resolution should at minimum specify the claim type and geographic scope to reflect the board's informed decision.
In plain language: Names the specific officer or officers — by title and optionally by name — who are empowered to take all steps necessary to prosecute the litigation on the company's behalf.
RESOLVED FURTHER, that the [CEO / President / General Counsel] of the Company, [NAME IF APPLICABLE], is hereby authorized and empowered, on behalf of the Company, to execute all documents, pleadings, and agreements, and to take all other actions reasonably necessary or advisable to carry out the foregoing resolution.
Common mistake: Authorizing 'any officer' without specifying a title. Courts and counsel need a named or titled individual to verify authority; overly broad language can create competing chains of instruction.
In plain language: Authorizes the engagement of a specific outside law firm or grants the authorized officer discretion to retain counsel, and approves the execution of an engagement letter.
RESOLVED FURTHER, that the Company is authorized to retain [LAW FIRM NAME] as litigation counsel in connection with the foregoing proceedings, and that the [CEO / General Counsel] is authorized to execute an engagement letter with such firm on terms approved by the Board.
Common mistake: Failing to include this clause entirely and relying on a general officer-authority clause. Most outside counsel will not accept a new litigation engagement without a board resolution specifically referencing their retention.
In plain language: Directs the company to preserve all documents, communications, and data relevant to the anticipated litigation, triggering the company's evidence preservation obligations.
RESOLVED FURTHER, that the appropriate officers of the Company shall take all steps necessary to preserve documents, electronically stored information, and other evidence potentially relevant to the litigation described herein, including issuing a litigation hold notice to all relevant employees.
Common mistake: Omitting the litigation hold clause from the resolution. Failure to issue a timely hold can result in spoliation sanctions — adverse inference instructions or evidence exclusion — even if the documents were lost inadvertently.
In plain language: Ratifies any steps already taken by officers or counsel before formal board authorization — such as sending demand letters, engaging preliminary counsel, or filing protective filings.
RESOLVED FURTHER, that all actions previously taken by the officers and agents of the Company in connection with the matters described herein — including any demand letters, preservation notices, or preliminary legal filings — are hereby ratified, confirmed, and approved as acts of the Company.
Common mistake: Omitting ratification when demand letters or cease-and-desist notices were already sent by management. Without ratification, those prior communications may be characterized as unauthorized acts of individual officers.
In plain language: Authorizes the company to pay litigation-related legal fees, court costs, and expenses up to a specified threshold or subject to officer approval.
RESOLVED FURTHER, that the [CFO / CEO] is authorized to approve and pay all reasonable legal fees, court filing fees, expert witness costs, and other expenses incurred in connection with the litigation, up to $[AMOUNT] without further board approval, with any amounts in excess subject to Board review.
Common mistake: Providing no fee-authorization ceiling at all. An open-ended fee authorization exposes the company to runaway litigation costs without any board oversight mechanism.
In plain language: The corporate secretary or an authorized officer certifies that the resolution was duly adopted, that a quorum was present or unanimous consent was obtained, and that it is a true and accurate record.
I, [CORPORATE SECRETARY NAME], Secretary of [COMPANY NAME], hereby certify that the foregoing resolutions were duly adopted by the Board of Directors at a meeting at which a quorum was present [or by unanimous written consent], and that such resolutions are in full force and effect as of the date hereof. _________________________ [CORPORATE SECRETARY SIGNATURE AND DATE]
Common mistake: Having only one director sign when the bylaws require the corporate secretary to certify separately. Courts and opposing parties frequently request a certified copy — an improperly executed resolution can be challenged as inadequate proof of authority.
Enter the company's exact registered legal name, the state or province of incorporation, and the entity type (corporation, LLC, nonprofit). Cross-reference the corporate registry filing to ensure the name matches exactly.
💡 Pull the most recent certificate of good standing — it confirms the legal name and that the company is authorized to do business, which opposing counsel may request.
Draft WHEREAS clauses that identify the adverse party by full legal name, describe the claim (breach of contract, IP infringement, fraud, etc.), state the approximate damages or relief sought, and reference any prior demand or notice already sent.
💡 Coordinate with litigation counsel before finalizing the recitals — overly broad or inaccurate descriptions can complicate the pleading if the resolution is attached to the complaint or referenced in discovery.
State that the company is authorized to file suit against the named adverse party, specify the type of claim and the intended court or jurisdiction, and confirm that the board has determined the action to be in the company's best interests.
💡 If the forum has not yet been determined, write 'in such court or jurisdiction as litigation counsel may advise' to preserve flexibility without leaving the clause empty.
Identify the officer — CEO, President, or General Counsel — who will instruct counsel and execute documents. Include their name if the individual is known at the time of adoption.
💡 Designate a backup officer in case the primary is unavailable to sign time-sensitive court filings or settlement documents.
Name the outside law firm being retained or authorize the designated officer to retain counsel. If the engagement letter has already been negotiated, reference it by date and firm name and authorize its execution.
💡 Ask counsel to review the draft resolution before adoption — they will confirm the scope of authority is sufficient for the specific proceedings and flag any jurisdiction-specific requirements.
Add a clause directing the appropriate officers to issue an immediate litigation hold notice to all employees who may have relevant documents, emails, or data — including IT systems, cloud storage, and personal devices used for company business.
💡 Date the litigation hold separately from the resolution and keep a log of who received it and when. The hold date, not the filing date, is what courts examine for spoliation purposes.
Convene a duly noticed board meeting at which a quorum is present, or obtain unanimous written consent from all directors if your bylaws permit. Record the vote accurately — including any abstentions or dissenting votes.
💡 Check your bylaws for the required quorum threshold and whether a simple majority or supermajority is needed for litigation authorization — some charters impose a higher bar for significant legal actions.
Have the corporate secretary sign the certification block, date it, and attach it to the company's minute book. Provide a certified copy to outside counsel, and retain the original in corporate records.
💡 Outside counsel will typically attach the certified resolution to their conflict-check and file-opening paperwork — send it promptly to avoid delays in engagement and filing deadlines.
A board resolution to commence litigation is a formal corporate document in which a company's board of directors votes to authorize the company to file a lawsuit against another party. It records the board's decision, identifies the adverse party and the nature of the claim, designates the officer empowered to act, appoints outside counsel, and directs the company to preserve relevant evidence. Courts and opposing counsel frequently require proof of this authorization before accepting that a corporation's lawsuit was properly approved.
In most jurisdictions, an officer acting without board authorization may technically be able to initiate a filing, but the company's right to pursue the litigation can be challenged. Courts, opposing counsel, and the company's own outside counsel will typically demand proof of board authority. Acting without it exposes the officer to personal liability for unauthorized acts and gives the adverse party grounds to seek dismissal or sanctions. The resolution eliminates this risk by creating a clear, dated record of authorized corporate action.
In most jurisdictions, a board resolution does not require notarization to be valid. It typically requires the corporate secretary's certification, the signatures of the required officers or directors, and inclusion in the company's minute book. Some banks, courts in specific matters, and foreign jurisdictions may request a notarized or apostille-authenticated copy — particularly for international litigation or enforcement proceedings. Check with litigation counsel whether any additional authentication is needed for the specific forum.
Board meeting minutes are the full record of everything discussed, voted on, and decided at a board meeting — including attendance, agenda items, debates, and all resolutions adopted. A board resolution is the specific operative decision extracted from or adopted independently of minutes. For litigation purposes, outside counsel and courts typically want the resolution as a standalone certified document, not a full set of minutes. The resolution is what outside counsel files or presents; the minutes stay in the corporate minute book.
Effective recitals identify the adverse party by full legal name, describe the nature of the dispute with enough specificity to distinguish it from other potential claims (e.g., citing the contract breached, the date of the breach, and the estimated damages), and state that the board has reviewed the matter and determined that litigation is in the company's best interests. Vague recitals such as 'a dispute exists' give officers ambiguous authority and may be challenged by the adverse party or revisited in discovery.
A single-member LLC typically does not have a board of directors, so the authorization mechanism differs. The sole member or manager may authorize litigation through a manager or member resolution, or through an operating agreement provision granting the managing member litigation authority. The concept is the same — creating a documented, dated authorization — but the governing document is the operating agreement rather than a board charter or bylaws. Outside counsel will still request proof of authority in the same format.
A resolution adopted without the quorum required by the company's bylaws or applicable corporate statute is voidable, meaning it can be challenged and potentially declared invalid. Opposing counsel may raise the defect as a standing or authority challenge in the litigation itself. The fix is to re-adopt the resolution at a properly constituted meeting or cure the defect through a unanimous written consent of all directors if the bylaws permit that procedure as an alternative to a meeting.
Yes, in most cases. The resolution is a privileged corporate document and should be treated as attorney-client privileged communication once it is shared with litigation counsel. Attaching it to public court filings or producing it in discovery without counsel review can waive privilege and disclose the board's litigation strategy, damages estimates, and internal deliberations. Distribute the certified copy only to outside counsel and retain the original in the company's sealed minute book.
Board meeting minutes are a comprehensive record of everything discussed and decided at a full board meeting — attendance, agenda, debates, and all votes. A board resolution to commence litigation is a focused, standalone authorization document that outside counsel and courts can act on directly. Minutes live in the minute book; the resolution is what gets certified and delivered to counsel. Many companies extract the relevant resolution from the minutes for distribution.
A written consent allows directors to adopt a resolution without convening a formal meeting, provided all required directors sign. It is functionally equivalent to a resolution adopted at a meeting and is permitted under most corporate statutes. Use a written consent when speed is critical — such as an impending statute-of-limitations deadline — and a formal meeting cannot be convened in time.
A demand letter is sent to the adverse party before filing suit, requesting cure or payment and signaling the company's intent to litigate if the demand is not met. It is not a governance document — it does not authorize the company to sue. The board resolution is the internal authorization; the demand letter is the external notice. In many disputes, the demand letter is sent first and the resolution ratifies it while also authorizing the next step.
An engagement letter is the contract between the company and its outside litigation counsel — covering scope, fees, and billing terms. The board resolution authorizes the company to retain counsel and commence proceedings; the engagement letter is the contract that implements that authorization. Outside counsel typically requires both before opening a file: the resolution confirms they have a properly authorized client, and the engagement letter governs the representation.
IP infringement claims, breach of SaaS subscription agreements, and misappropriation of trade secrets by departed employees frequently require rapid board authorization to meet statute-of-limitations deadlines.
Fraud recovery actions, breach of fiduciary duty claims, and regulatory enforcement support commonly require board-level authorization, with heightened scrutiny from regulators on the governance process followed.
Construction defect claims, landlord-tenant disputes, and title litigation require board or manager authorization that is often reviewed by title insurers and lenders as part of the affected property's due diligence.
Supplier breach, product liability counterclaims, and distribution agreement disputes require board authorization that also triggers supply-chain litigation hold obligations covering procurement and quality records.
Billing disputes, insurance subrogation claims, and contract enforcement against payers require board authorization documented in compliance with healthcare governance standards and accreditation requirements.
Fee recovery actions, breach of engagement agreements, and non-compete enforcement against departed partners all require board or managing-partner resolutions before outside counsel will open a file.
Under the Model Business Corporation Act and most state corporation statutes, the board of directors has plenary authority over corporate litigation decisions. Delaware corporations — home to over 60% of Fortune 500 companies — require board authorization for significant litigation under DGCL §141. Derivative actions require a prior demand on the board or a showing that demand is excused under the Aronson test. Federal courts and most state courts routinely request a certified resolution as proof of authority when a corporation appears as plaintiff.
Under the Canada Business Corporations Act and provincial equivalents (OBCA, ABCA, BCBCA), the board of directors manages the affairs of the corporation and must authorize material legal actions. Quebec civil law principles apply to corporations incorporated under the QCA — the authorization mechanics are similar but procedural rules for corporate authorizations may differ. Certified resolutions are standard practice and are required by most Canadian litigation counsel before accepting instructions.
Under the Companies Act 2006, the board of directors is responsible for managing the company's affairs, including authorizing litigation. Decisions may be made by written resolution or at a board meeting with the requisite quorum under the company's articles of association. Derivative claims under Part 11 of the Companies Act 2006 require court permission and cannot be authorized by an ordinary board resolution alone. Outside solicitors are required to conduct client due diligence confirming authority before accepting instructions.
Corporate governance frameworks across EU member states require board or management board authorization for significant legal proceedings, though the structure varies — two-tier board systems in Germany and the Netherlands separate supervisory and management functions. In France, the Conseil d'Administration must authorize material litigation under the company's statuts. GDPR considerations arise when litigation involves processing personal data of EU data subjects, requiring a lawful basis assessment before disclosure in discovery or cross-border proceedings.
| Path | Best for | Cost | Time |
|---|---|---|---|
| Use the template | Small businesses and startups with straightforward, single-defendant claims where the board is aligned and internal counsel can review | Free | 30–60 minutes |
| Template + legal review | Companies with complex bylaws, multi-defendant actions, cross-border disputes, or where privilege and confidentiality are a concern | $300–$800 for a one-hour outside counsel review | 1–2 business days |
| Custom drafted | Public companies, heavily regulated entities, derivative actions, or litigation involving material shareholder or regulatory disclosure obligations | $1,000–$3,000+ | 3–7 business days |
This document is one of 3,000+ business & legal templates included in Business in a Box.
Access over 3,000+ business and legal templates for any business task, project or initiative.
Customize your ready-made business document template and save it in the cloud.
Share your files and folders with your team. Create a space of seamless collaboration.
"Fantastic value! I'm not sure how I'd do without it. It's worth its weight in gold and paid back for itself many times."
"I have been using Business in a Box for years. It has been the most useful source of templates I have encountered. I recommend it to anyone."
"It has been a life saver so many times I have lost count. Business in a Box has saved me so much time and as you know, time is money."
Stop downloading documents. Start operating with clarity. Business in a Box gives you the Business Operating System used by over 250,000 companies worldwide to structure, run, and grow their business.
Start free · No credit card required
