United States: Delaware Chancery Court Appraisal Price Almost 30% over Merger Price; New York Adopts Delaware Standard for Review of Controlling Stockholder Mergers (Corporate Alert: June 2016)

The Herrick Advantage

Herrick is pleased to have represented Silas Capital in its investment in Boll & Branch ("B&B"), a luxury bedding and linens brand that ethically sources its products. In keeping with its "fairness from the ground up" philosophy, B&B uses a cost-saving, online direct-to-consumer model and passes the savings to its farmers, factory workers and customers. Silas Capital will play an active role in helping B&B increase sales and market share, and further solidify the company's position in the emerging direct-to-consumer luxury home textiles category. Corporate partner Irwin Kishner and counsel Joel Wagman represented Silas on the deal.


Delaware Chancery Court Appraisal Price Almost 30% over Merger Price

The Delaware Chancery Court ruled that merger consideration offered in a going-private transaction did not reflect the "fair value" of the company's common stock. As a result, the company was required to pay the dissenting stockholders that perfected appraisal rights a 28% premium over the merger consideration paid to stockholders that approved the going-private transaction. The Court reached its ruling despite evidence that a lengthy and robust sales process had been engaged in by the company. The Court found that the company's investors were focused on the short term and as a result there was a significant valuation gap between the market price of the company's common stock and the intrinsic value of the company. Additional factors which led to the Court's ruling were (i) the status of the going-private transaction as a management-led buyout rather than an arm's-length, third-party merger; (ii) the decision of the special committee of directors not to contact any potential strategic bidders; and (iii) the relatively large size of the going-private transaction. This decision serves as a reminder that appraisal exposure continues to be an important consideration for buyers of public companies incorporated in Delaware.

In re Appraisal of Dell Inc., C.A. No. 9322-VCL (Del. Ch. Ct. May 31, 2016)


New York Adopts Delaware Standard for Review of Controlling Stockholder Mergers

The New York Court of Appeals adopted the business judgment standard of review established by the Delaware Supreme Court for going-private mergers involving a controlling stockholder. The controlling stockholder made an offer to take the company private which was conditioned upon the approval of both a special committee of independent directors and the vote of a majority of the minority stockholders. After months of negotiation, the going-private transaction was approved by the special committee and 99% of the minority stockholders. Despite such approvals, certain stockholders filed suit claiming that the going-private transaction should have been subject to scrutiny under the heightened "entire fairness" standard of review. Application of the "entire fairness" standard of review would place the burden on the directors to show that they engaged in a fair process and obtained a fair price. In contrast, under the business judgment standard of review, the Court will afford deference to decisions made by directors in the absence of fraud or bad faith.

The Court unanimously disagreed with the position of the stockholders that filed suit. In reaching its decision, the Court reasoned that overall the business judgment standard of review properly considers the rights of the minority stockholders and weighs them against the interests of the directors and controlling stockholders in avoiding frivolous litigation and protecting independently made business decisions from unwarranted judicial interference.

In re Kenneth Cole Prods., Inc. S'holder Litig., No. 54 (N.Y. Ct. of App. May 5, 2016)


SEC Settles Unregistered Broker-Dealer Enforcement Action Brought Against Private Equity Fund Advisor

The SEC settled an enforcement action brought against a private equity firm advisor and its owner. The SEC alleged that the advisor acted as an unregistered broker-dealer with respect to certain activities involving the advisor's portfolio companies. The Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, defines a broker as any person engaged in the business of effecting transactions in securities for the account of others. The specific actions engaged in by the advisor were the solicitation of deals, identification of buyers or sellers, negotiation and structuring of transactions, arrangement of financing and execution of transactions on behalf of the advisor's portfolio companies. The settlement required the payment of more than $3 million in total fines, including disgorgement and interest penalties. This enforcement action marks the first time the SEC has taken the position that the receipt of portfolio company transaction fees by a private equity firm advisor triggers an obligation to register as a broker-dealer.

Blackstreet Capital Mgmt., LLC, Exchange Act Rel. No. 77959, Advisers Act Rel. No. 4411 (June 1, 2016)


New York Appellate Court Recognizes Minority Discount for Partnership Interest Valuation

The Appellate Division of New York's Second Judicial Department ruled in a case of first impression that a "minority discount" may be applied in determining the value of a partnership interest for purposes of Section 69 of the New York Partnership Law. Section 69 entitles a partner who has wrongfully caused the dissolution of a partnership to be paid the value of his interest in the partnership less any damages caused to his partners by the dissolution. The lower court found that the partnership had been wrongfully dissolved and in determining the value of the interest of the partner which caused the wrongful dissolution, applied a 15% discount for goodwill and a 35% discount to account for limited marketability. The lower court, however, refused to apply a minority discount concluding that it was not permitted to do so based upon case law involving valuation of a minority stockholder's stock in a close corporation. The case law relied upon by the lower court held that imposing a minority discount would conflict with equitable principles of corporate governance designed to prevent stockholders from being treated differently and may encourage oppressive majority stockholder conduct to drive out minority stockholders. The Appellate Division found that the concerns expressed in the corporate context were not implicated. In the case before it, the Appellate Division was not confronted with a dissolution caused by any action on the part of the majority, but rather the wrongful conduct of a minority partner.

Congel v. Malfitano, No. 220/07 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. App. Div., 2nd Dept. May 18, 2016)


Delaware Bankruptcy Court Recognizes Commencement of Chapter 11 Case Not Authorized under Operating Agreement

The Delaware Bankruptcy Court refused to recognize a secured lender's motion to dismiss a Chapter 11 case that had been commenced without the unanimous consent of all the members. The secured lender, an energy fund, had provided secured note financing to the limited liability company. As a result of a covenant default under the secured notes, the limited liability company agreed to amend its operating agreement to (i) admit the energy fund as a member holding a single unit for a capital contribution of $1 and (ii) require the unanimous approval of the members in order to institute a voluntary bankruptcy action. The energy fund argued that the limited liability company's bankruptcy case filing should be dismissed for lack of requisite corporate authority. The Court, however, held that the provision requiring the energy fund's consent in order to institute a voluntary bankruptcy action was void as a matter of federal public policy which strongly disfavors contractual provisions precluding business entities from seeking the rights and protections available under the federal Bankruptcy Code. In so holding, the Court found that the energy fund's primary relationship with the limited liability company was that of a creditor, rather than an equity holder.

In re Intervention Energy Holdings, LLC, Case No. 16-11247 (KJC) (Del. Bankr. Ct. D. Del. June 3, 2016)


Delaware Supreme Court Upholds Dismissal of Aiding and Abetting Claim Against Financial Advisor in Merger Transaction

The Delaware Supreme Court upheld the dismissal of a stockholder lawsuit brought against a board of directors and its financial advisor. The lawsuit was based on a claim that a financial advisor had aided and abetted a board of directors in breaching the fiduciary duty owed in the sale of a company via a merger transaction. The merger was approved by a fully informed, uncoerced vote of the company's disinterested stockholders. This approval was sufficient to invoke the application of the business judgment rule as the standard against which the fairness of the merger would be reviewed. The Court ruled that, absent an allegation of corporate waste, the business judgment rule warranted dismissal of the breach of fiduciary duty claim. Accordingly, since there was no viable claim against the board of directors for breach of fiduciary duty, there could be no aiding and abetting claim against the financial advisor.

Singh v. Attencorough, No. 645, 2015 (Del. Sup. Ct. May 6, 2016 (en banc))


Delaware Chancery Court Finds Board of Directors Did Not Act in Bad Faith With Respect to Projections

The Delaware Chancery Court dismissed claims that the board of directors of a target company acted in bad faith and breached its duty of loyalty by directing its financial advisor to ignore certain projections having application to the sale of the target company. The claimants alleged that the financial advisor was directed by the board of directors to ignore two sets of favorable projections. After reviewing the projections at issue, the Court found that the projections were highly speculative and based on unlikely scenarios. In dismissing the claims, the Court ruled that in order to successfully plead a claim of bad faith (which the Court noted was rare), the claimants needed to prove that the decision to exclude the projections was "so far beyond the bounds of reasonable judgment that it seems inexplicable on any ground other than bad faith."

In re Chelsea Therapeutics International Ltd. Stockholder Litig., Consol. C.A. No. 9640-VCG (Del. Ch. Ct. May 20, 2016)


Delaware Chancery Court Finds Improper Delegation of Authority by Limited Liability Companies

The Delaware Chancery Court ruled that a Delaware limited liability company ("LLC") managed by a board of directors and a manager-managed Delaware LLC lacked authority to delegate the power to act as a special litigation committee to a retired federal court judge unaffiliated with the limited liability companies. Based upon its review of the operating agreements for the Delaware LLCs, the Court found that the right to control litigation was expressly reserved for the board of directors and the manager, respectively. In particular, the operating agreements provided for the delegation of authority only to committees comprised of one or more directors or managers.

The Delaware LLCs unsuccessfully relied upon Section 18-407 of the Delaware Limited Liability Company Act. Section 18-407 provides that unless otherwise provided in the operating agreement, a member or manager of an LLC has the power and authority to delegate to one or more other persons the rights and powers to manage and control the business and affairs of the LLC. The Court ruled that the language of Section 18-407 was insufficient to overcome the specific language in the operating agreements addressing the manner in which litigation-related matters would be controlled.

Obeid v. Hogan, C.A. No. 11900-VCL (Del. Ch. Ct. June 10, 2016)

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
 
In association with
Related Topics
 
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