SPACs

Subscribe to SPACs

In the wake of the SPAC frenzy, which peaked in 2021, investors have filed a significant number of SPAC-related lawsuits, including not only securities class action lawsuits, but also including Delaware direct action breach of fiduciary duty suits. The Delaware actions have so far in at least some cases proven to be successful. More recently, however, the Delaware courts have projected impatience and even fatigue with these kinds of suits, and in at least one recent case, granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss. However, in a more recent case, the Delaware Chancery Court, although noting that the plaintiff’s allegations are “not strong” and “close to the line between an adequate and an inadequate claim,” denied the defendants’ dismissal motion. There are several interesting features to court’s opinion, as discussed below. The Delaware Chancery Court’s October 18, 2024, opinion can be found here.Continue Reading Del. Court Denies Dismissal Motion in SPAC-Related Action

Long-time readers know that the significant amount of SPAC activity in past years led to a surge in SPAC-related litigation. Some of this litigation has taken the form of traditional securities class action lawsuits. However, among the more noteworthy developments in the rise of SPAC-related litigation has been the emergence of a separate type of suit, the Delaware direct action breach of fiduciary class action lawsuit, sometimes referred to a MultiPlan claim in reference to the first suit of the type to be filed. As detailed below, these kinds of lawsuits have gone through a relatively swift evolution. Many of the these kinds of cases remain pending, have not yet reached the settlement stage. However, the GeneDX lawsuit, which is one of these kinds of cases, recently settled for $21 million, subject to court approval. There are a number of interesting aspects of this settlement, as discussed below. The parties settlement stipulation in the case can be found here.Continue Reading Delaware SPAC-Related Direct Action Breach of Fiduciary Duty Suit Settles for $21 Million

For the last several years, securities class action lawsuits related to SPACs and de-SPACs have been a significant factor in the overall annual number of securities suit filings. SPAC-related suits remain a significant factor in the number of filings again this year, even though it has now been several years since the peak of the SPAC frenzy. In the latest example, on October 17, 2024, a plaintiff shareholder filed a securities suit against cannabis company WM Technology alleging that both prior to and following its predecessor company’s merger with a SPAC, the company misrepresented a key customer engagement metric. The new lawsuit has some interesting features, as discussed below. A copy of the complaint can be found here.Continue Reading Cannabis Company Hit With SPAC-Related Securities Suits

As I have noted in numerous posts on this site (most recently here), SPAC-related litigation has been a significant factor in the overall volume of corporate and securities litigation filings in recent years. But while I have been attentive to noting the lawsuits as they have been filed, it could be argued that I have not been as dutiful in noting how these cases are being resolved. One recent case resolution – the settlement of the various SPAC-related litigation involving ATI Physical Therapy – is particularly interesting. The court recently approved the settlement of these cases for a total of $31 million. As discussed below, there are several interesting features of these settlements. The court’s approval of the settlements is detailed in a September 24, 2024, Law360 article (here).Continue Reading ATI Physical Therapy Settles SPAC-Related Litigation for $31 Million

In a significant number of the many SPAC-related lawsuits that have been filed in recent years, SPAC investors allege that executives at the previously private target company into which the SPAC merged made pre-merger misrepresentations about the target company’s operations or prospects. In an interesting decision in a securities suit involving Lucid Motors and that has a great deal of potential significance for many of these SPAC-related suits, the Ninth Circuit has held that the SPAC investors, who were neither purchasers nor sellers of the stock of the target company, lack standing to pursue their claims against Lucid Motors for alleged pre-merger misrepresentations. The Ninth Circuit’s August 8, 2024, opinion in the Lucid Motors case can be found here.Continue Reading 9th Circ.: SPAC Investors Lack Standing to Sue Over Merger Target Company’s Misrepresentations

As readers of this blog know, one of the vestiges of the SPAC frenzy that peaked in 2021 is a large volume of SPAC-related securities class action litigation; indeed, as I have recently noted, SPAC-related securities class action lawsuits continue to be filed. In addition to these federal court securities suits, prospective claimants with SPAC-related grievances have also filed Delaware state court breach of fiduciary duty actions, a form of litigation often referred to as “MultiPlan actions,” in reference to the MultiPlan lawsuit, which, as discussed here, was the first of these Delaware court actions to survive a motion to dismiss. Since the ruling in the MultiPlan case, plaintiffs have largely been successful in surviving dismissal motions in these kinds of cases.

However, as discussed in a June 2024 memo from the Skadden law firm (here), in May 2024, the Delaware Court of Chancery granted the motion to dismiss in the SPAC-related direct action breach of fiduciary duty suit relating to Canoo Inc., a company that was the result of a 2020 merger with a publicly traded SPAC, Hennessy Capital Acquisition Corp. IV. According to the law firm memo, the Court’s ruling was the first opinion granting a motion to dismiss in a MultiPlan claim. As discussed below, the Court’s opinion reflects a number of interesting observations about the lawsuit and claims of this type. A copy of the Court’s May 31, 2024 opinion can be found here. Continue Reading Delaware Court Grants Dismissal Motion in SPAC Transaction Proxy Disclosure Case

In my recent review of the 1H24 securities class action litigation filings (here), I noted that SPAC-related securities suits were less of a factor in the overall number of suit filings during the year’s first six months than they had been in recent years. However, even though the peak of the SPAC frenzy was several years ago now, SPAC-related securities suits are continuing to be filed. The latest example is the SPAC-related securities suit filed late last week against SeaStar Medical Holding Corporation, which is the product of a 2022 SPAC merger. The new lawsuit has several interesting features, as discussed below. A copy of the July 5, 2024, complaint in the lawsuit can be found here.Continue Reading Medical Device Company Hit with SPAC-Related Securities Lawsuit

SPACs were back in the business headlines again last Friday, as the news circulated that shareholders of Digital World Acquisition Corp., a special purpose acquisition company, had approved the proposed business combination with Trump Media & Technology Group, the corporate parent of Truth Social, Donald Trump’s social media company. On the same day, in a reminder of what has happened to all too many companies that merged with SPACs during the peak of the SPAC frenzy in 2020 and 2021, shareholders of a SPAC that merged with an electric vehicle company sued the directors and officers of the SPAC as well as the EV company, alleging that in the merger proxy statement the defendants failed to disclose multiple business problems at the target company. The lawsuit is the latest SPAC-related securities suit to be filed after the collapse of the SPAC surge.Continue Reading EV Company Hit With SPAC-Related Securities Suit