ESG is a hot topic. There is a general perception in certain circles – including the D&O insurance community — that ESG awareness and activism are essential  attributes of good corporate citizenship. There is even a perception in certain parts of the D&O insurance community that strong ESG credentials makes individual companies better D&O risks. However, as the securities class action lawsuit recently filed against U.K consumer products company Unilever shows, activism on ESG issues can, in fact, lead to D&O claims. The complaint in the Unilever action, which makes for interesting reading and arguably has important implications, can be found here. Continue Reading Can ESG-Motivated Company Actions Lead to Corporate and Securities Litigation?

Regular readers of this blog know that class action securities fraud lawsuits almost never go to trial. But “almost never” is not the same as “never.” Every now and then, there is an unusual case that does go to trial. This past week, a federal court jury reached a verdict in one of those rare and unusual cases. On June 14, 2022, a federal jury in the Southern District of New York held after trial that Michael Reger, co-founder of Dakota Plains Holdings, Inc. was liable for securities fraud and control person fraud, but not for insider trading. Reger was the sole remaining defendant in the case after the other defendants last month reached a settlement. A copy of the jury’s June 14, 2022 verdict form can be found here. Continue Reading Rare Jury Verdict in Securities Fraud Lawsuit

Businesses currently face a host of challenging operating circumstances: supply chain issues; labor shortages; economic inflation; the war in Ukraine; and the continuing disruptive effects of the pandemic. As a new securities class action lawsuit filed this week against the consumer product company Tupperware shows, these kinds of operating conditions not only create business and financial risk for many companies, but these conditions can also translate into litigation risk, as well. A copy of the securities lawsuit complaint filed recently against Tupperware can be found here. Continue Reading Business and Litigation Risk in a Challenging Operating and Economic Environment

As I detailed in blog posts at the time, the parties to two separate shareholder derivative lawsuits in recent months announced what were among the largest derivative suit settlements – the massive $300 settlement in the Renren derivative lawsuit and the $180 million settlement in the FirstEnergy derivative lawsuit. Though the settlements in each of these two cases were announced to great fanfare, both settlements, for separate reasons, ran into procedural roadblocks. There have now been further developments in each of these cases – the Renren settlement appears to be back on track, while the federal district judge presiding over one of the unconsolidated FirstEnergy derivative suits continues to throw up roadblocks, as discussed below. Continue Reading Further Developments in Two Recent Jumbo Derivative Lawsuit Settlements

I was struck by the recent statements of Chubb CEO Evan Greenberg quoted an insurance industry publication that a colleague circulated to me last week. In the article, Greenberg said that when it comes to ESG commitments, many companies – particularly insurance companies – may be over-promising. What made Greenberg’s remarks particularly interesting to me was his suggestion that companies’ commitment to net-zero goals and other lofty-sounding climate aspirations could lead to shareholder lawsuits. It is worth thinking about this litigation possibility in the context of current regulatory action focused on so-called “greenwashing” in the investment fund industry. In both cases, the concern is that companies may tried to take on an ESG aura that the actual facts may not support. Continue Reading Will Companies’ ESG Goals Lead to Shareholder Litigation?

In a series of opinions beginning with the Delaware Supreme Court’s 2019 decision in Marchand v. Barnhill, Delaware courts have sustained a number of so-called “Caremark” claims based on the defendant board members’ breach of their duty of oversight. The courts have denied motions to dismiss in cases where the boards failed to act despite “red flags” alerting them to problems. But what happens if the “red flag” that alerts the board to a problem is a litigation demand letter submitted by a prospective claimant seeking to have the board take up litigation because of problems identified in the letter? In an interesting and troubling May 24, 2022 decision, Vice Chancellor Travis Laster sustained a claim based on these kinds of allegations, accepting what he called a “novel theory” with “admitted trepidation.” Though Laster sought in his opinion to contain some the more “disquieting” implications of this ruling, there is now at least a theoretical basis on which future prospective claimants could argue that a board’s rejection of a litigation demand letter could itself give rise to a separate breach of fiduciary duty claim. Continue Reading Del. Court Sustains Breach of Fiduciary Duty Claim for Board’s Rejection of Demand Letter

In a milestone in the development of collective investor actions in Germany, a plaintiff in a proceeding against Hypo Real Estate Holding and arising out of the global financial crisis had reached an agreement to settle the action for €190 million. The case against Hypo Real Estate Holding was brought under the German Capital Markets Model Case Act, known as KapMuG. As discussed below, this settlement has very important implications for the development of collective investor actions in Germany, and, indeed, worldwide. A copy of the plaintiff law firm’s June 1, 2022 press release describing the settlement can be found here. Continue Reading German Collective Investor Action Against Hypo Real Estate Holding Settled for 190 Million Euros

As I have noted in recent posts (here, for example), SPAC-related securities suit filings continue to accumulate and represent a significant current securities litigation phenomenon. But while the number of suits continues to mount, relatively few of these cases have yet reached the dismissal stage. In a recent ruling, however, the defendant company’s motion to dismiss in a SPAC-related securities suit was substantially denied as to the company itself and its top executives. In particular, the claims based on allegations that the company, Romeo Power, and its senior officials made supply chain misrepresentations were sustained, though the related claims against three former executives of the SPAC with which Romeo had merged were dismissed. A copy of the June 2, 2022 opinion in the case can be found here. Continue Reading Dismissal Denied in SPAC-Related Securities Suit Alleging Supply Chain Misrepresentations

In the latest SPAC-related securities class action lawsuit filing, a plaintiff shareholder has filed a securities suit against IonQ, a quantum computing company that became a publicly traded company in September 2021 through a merger with a publicly traded SPAC. As is the case with many of the SPAC-related securities suits, the new lawsuit against IonQ follows the publication of a critical short-seller report about the company and its technology. A copy of the complaint, filed on May 31, 2022, can be found here. Continue Reading Quantum Computing Company Hit with SPAC-Related Securities Suit After Short-Seller Report