shareholder standing and only the corporation may bring suit. Seidl v. Am. Century Cos., 427 Fed.Appx. 35, 38 (2d Cir.2011) (applying Maryland law); Waller, 49 A.2d at 452 (stating that corporate malfeasance that reduces or destroys the value of a corporation’s stock is not considered to cause a direct harm to shareholders and the cause of action belongs to the corporation). The alleged direct injury to a shareholder must be independent of any injury to the corporation itself. Tooley v. Donaldson, Lufkin, & Jenrette, Inc., 845 A.2d 1031, 1039 (Del.2004). Courts applying Maryland law have also held that a shareholder may bring a direct action against a corporation’s officers and directors if there is a breach of a duty owed directly to the shareholder. See, e.g. Waller, 49 A.2d at 454 (<HOLDING>); Schettino v. Modanlo, 2005 WL 914376, at
holding violation of right to testify could not be harmless holding that a direct action could not be maintained because the declaration does not allege the violation of any right personal to plaintiff but only violation of rights common to all the stockholders holding that where an individual is deprived of liberty or property interests in violation of article of the state declaration of rights he may enforce those rights by a common law action for damages holding that defendant is entitled to qualified immunity because plaintiff failed to allege the violation of a clearly established constitutional right holding that one claim was not preempted because it did not allege the violation of duties created by any welfare plan but a violation of duties as a past employer