United States: Delaware Supreme Court Decision In Rural/Metro Affirms $76 Million Judgment Against Third-Party Advisor For Aiding And Abetting Breaches Of Fiduciary Duty By Board, But Rejects Suggestion Of ‘Gatekeeper' Duties

On November 30, 2015, the Delaware Supreme Court affirmed post-trial decisions by the Delaware Court of Chancery (i) holding RBC Capital Markets, LLC liable to Rural/Metro Corp. shareholders for nearly $76 million based upon a finding that RBC had aided and abetted the Rural/Metro board of directors' breach of fiduciary duty by manipulating Rural/Metro's 2011 sale process, and (ii) limiting the parties from whom RBC could claim settlement contribution to those who had been adjudicated joint tortfeasors based on the record at trial – a group that was held to exclude director defendants who would have qualified for exculpation from money liability under the corporation's certificate of incorporation. RBC Capital Markets, LLC v. Jervis ("Rural/Metro"), No. 140, 2015, 2015 WL 7721882 (Del. Nov. 30, 2015). This ruling represents the first time Delaware's highest court has held a financial advisor liable to shareholders for aiding and abetting a corporate board's breach of the duty of care, continuing its recent string of rulings applying closer scrutiny to investment banker conflicts. It also confirms that the protections afforded to director defendants under § 102(b)(7) can in some circumstances operate to increase the damages imposed against other defendants who do not qualify for exculpation. The Court's decision also expressly disavowed the lower court's suggestion that financial advisors were "gatekeepers" with an obligation to affirmatively prevent fiduciaries from breaching their duties of care to constituents.

A. Background Facts

Rural/Metro Corp. ("Rural") is a leading national provider of ambulance and private fire protection services. On March 28, 2011, Rural announced it had agreed to sell itself to an affiliate of private equity fund Warburg Pincus LLC ("Warburg"). Shareholder class action litigation followed, with the plaintiff class pursuing breach of fiduciary duty claims against six Rural directors who had approved the transaction, as well as aiding and abetting claims against Rural's financial advisors, RBC Capital Markets, LLC ("RBC") and Moelis & Company, LLC ("Moelis"). Following submission of pre-trial opening briefs by all parties, the director defendants and Moelis reached settlements with the plaintiff class. The case proceeded to trial solely against RBC.

On March 7, 2014, Vice Chancellor Travis Laster of the Delaware Court of Chancery issued an opinion finding that Rural's board of directors (the "Board") had breached its duty of care, and that RBC had aided and abetted those breaches. In re Rural Metro Corp. ("Rural I"), 88 A.3d 54, 95 (Del. Ch. 2014). The opinion found that RBC had timed Rural's sale process to coincide with the ongoing sale of Emergency Medical Services Corporation ("EMS") – owner of Rural's lone national competitor in the ambulance business – in the hopes of (i) leveraging its sell-side role with Rural to secure buy-side roles with firms bidding for EMS, and (ii) offering staple financing to Rural's potential buyers. The trial court also found that RBC disclosed only this latter intent to Rural. Furthermore, RBC's engagement letter with Rural contained no non-reliance disclaimer precluding claims against RBC for failures to inform the Board about specific conflicts of interest. Warburg was the only bidder to submit a final bid for Rural, and RBC was directed to engage in final negotiations over price. According to the trial court's factual findings, RBC solicited Warburg for a role in the buy-side financing during these negotiations and did not disclose its efforts and interests to the Board. Warburg ultimately declined to use RBC to finance its offer, but the court concluded that RBC's solicitations had affected Rural's negotiating position over the final sale price. Rural accepted Warburg's final offer of $17.25 per share. On October 10, 2014, the trial court issued a second opinion, determining that Rural was worth $21.42 per share at the time of the Warburg transaction, resulting in a total damages figure of $91.3 million. In re Rural/Metro Corp. Shareholders Litig. ("Rural II"), 102 A.3d 205 (Del. Ch. 2014).

B. Liability for Aiding & Abetting a Breach of Fiduciary Duty

Based upon the Board's failure to properly inform itself and take reasonable steps to maximize Rural's sale price at auction, the trial court concluded that the Board had breached its duty of care under Revlon's enhanced scrutiny standard. It then concluded that RBC – by allegedly creating the unreasonable sale process and informational gaps that led to the Board's breach of duty – had knowingly participated in this breach, rendering it liable for aiding and abetting the Board's predicate breach of fiduciary duty. In dicta, the trial court also observed that "[d]irectors are not expected to have the expertise to determine a corporation's value for themselves, or have the time or ability to design and carry out a sale process. Financial advisors provide these expert services. In doing so, they function as gatekeepers." Rural I, at 88. The threat of aiding and abetting liability, it continued, would help incentivize gatekeepers to provide sound advice, monitor clients and deter client wrongs.

On appeal, RBC and amicus curiae the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association ("SIFMA") argued that a third party cannot knowingly participate in a Board's breach of the duty of care because such breaches are, by definition, only grossly negligent, and therefore lack the level of intentionality necessary for a third party to "knowingly participate" in them. The Delaware Supreme Court rejected this contention. It explained that "[i]t is the aider and abettor," not the predicate fiduciary, "that must act with scienter," and affirmed the trial court's "narrow" holding that "if the third party knows that the board is breaching its duty of care and participates in the breach by misleading the board or creating the informational vacuum, then the third party can be liable for aiding and abetting." Rural/Metro, Op. at 74. Noting that the trial court's findings – which RBC did not directly challenge on appeal – had established the "intentionality of RBC's conduct" and "knowledge of the reality that the Board was proceeding on the basis of fragmentary and misleading information," the Court affirmed RBC's liability for aiding and abetting. Id. at 76.

In response to SIFMA's concern that permitting a claim for aiding and abetting a breach of the duty of care could create an imbalance of responsibilities where a non-fiduciary could be held liable for an unintentional violation of a fiduciary duty by a fiduciary, the Court concluded that these concerns were overstated in light of its ruling that the aider and abettor must act with scienter, making such a claim "among the most difficult to prove." Id. at 80-81. It also emphasized that its "holding is a narrow one that should not be read expansively to suggest that any failure on the part of a financial advisor to prevent directors from breaching their duty of care gives rise to a claim for aiding and abetting a breach of the duty of care." Id. at 80 (emphasis in orig.). In a lengthy footnote, the Court then expressly disavowed the trial court's "gatekeeper" designation, which it said would "inappropriately expand" its otherwise narrow holding. Id. at 80-81 n.191.

C. Joint Tortfeasor Contribution & Section 102(b)(7) Exculpation

Although RBC would have been liable for the entire $91.3 million damages award under the common law (as an aider and abettor jointly and severally liable for the injury), the Delaware Uniform Contribution Among Tortfeasors Acts ("DUCATA") entitled RBC to "settlement credits," reducing its liability in an amount equal to the pro rata share of responsibility for the total damages allocable to any "joint tortfeasors" that had already settled with the plaintiff class. After trial, the parties provided supplemental briefing and argument on the extent and amount of such credits, and RBC bore the burden of establishing which parties were joint tortfeasors. Critically, the trial court held that any Rural directors who qualified for exculpation from financial liability under the company's § 102(b)(7) provision could not be deemed joint tortfeasors under DUCATA. It was thus incumbent upon RBC to establish that the directors would not have qualified for exculpation under § 102(b)(7) and that, but for the settlement, they would have shared a common liability to the plaintiff class. Contrary to RBC's position, the trial court held that RBC would have to make this showing based on the record presented at trial. Because RBC had pursued a "unified front" defense at trial – arguing that it could not have aided and abetted the Board's breach of the duty of care because the Board had committed no such breach – there was little such evidence available. Reviewing the record, the trial court concluded that the interests of three director defendants raised questions about whether they had acted loyally and in good faith. Two of these three directors had testified at trial and, after assessing their testimony, the trial court found that they did not qualify for exculpation. The third director had not testified at trial. The trial court held that RBC had not established this director would not have qualified for exculpation, but noted that if he "had testified . . . and performed poorly or had been impeached on cross examination, then [it] might have concluded that exculpation would have been unavailable." Rural II, at 259.1 The trial court then determined that the two aforementioned defendants bore a 17% share of the responsibility for the damages suffered by the class, while RBC was responsible for 83% of the damages, an amount equal to $75,798,550.33.

The Delaware Supreme Court affirmed each of the foregoing determinations on appeal.

D. Looking Forward

The Rural/Metro decision continues the Delaware Supreme Court's spate of recent decisions closely scrutinizing financial advisor conflicts, and confirms that third-party financial advisors may be held liable for aiding and abetting fiduciaries' breaches of the duty of care owed to their constituents. It must be noted, however, that the Supreme Court described its holding as "narrow," establishing a "difficult to prove" standard of liability that was satisfied here by the "unusual facts" found by the trial court. Moreover, the Court cautioned that it is difficult to establish that a financial advisor acted with scienter and explicitly disavowed the lower court's "gatekeeper" dicta. Together, this limits the likelihood of success for aiding and abetting claims against financial advisors predicated on anything less than conscious wrongdoing. The Rural/Metro decision stands most importantly as reinforcement for the proposition that third-party financial advisors should take pains to fully and accurately disclose actual and potential conflicts to their clients as they arise.

The secondary ramifications of Rural/Metro pertain to trial practice and evaluation of liability in multiparty M&A litigation. The possibility that § 102(b)(7) protection will amplify awards against non-exculpated defendants must be taken into account when considering whether defendants should present a united front at trial because if this fails to result in complete victory, it could result in exculpation for some defendants and increased liability for others. The latter group, moreover, would have lost the opportunity to introduce evidence that their liability should be reduced by the damages attributable to the former. By the same token, the trial court's stated difficulty in finding non- testifying defendants ineligible for § 102(b)(7) exculpation suggests that non-settling defendants should employ efforts to compel settling defendants to appear at trial to defend their conduct.

Footnotes

1 The Rural II court also determined that Moelis was not a joint tortfeasor because RBC had failed to prove that Moelis had aided and abetted the Board's breaches.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Authors
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
 
In association with
Related Topics
 
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Related Articles
 
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Tools
Print
Font Size:
Translation
Channels
Mondaq on Twitter
 
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
 
Email Address
Company Name
Password
Confirm Password
Position
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Accounting
 Anti-trust
 Commercial
 Compliance
 Consumer
 Criminal
 Employment
 Energy
 Environment
 Family
 Finance
 Government
 Healthcare
 Immigration
 Insolvency
 Insurance
 International
 IP
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Litigation
 Media & IT
 Privacy
 Real Estate
 Strategy
 Tax
 Technology
 Transport
 Wealth Mgt
Regions
Africa
Asia
Asia Pacific
Australasia
Canada
Caribbean
Europe
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
U.K.
United States
Worldwide Updates
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.

Disclaimer

The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.

General

Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions