LegalCaseDocs.com
shopping cart  
  |     
Search
 

 
New Visitors


 VeriSign Secure Site

 Get Adobe Reader

ISQUITH v SPELLING ENTERTAINMENT GROUP Click to find out why . . .



Keywords & Phrases
CaseNo: C.A. No. 17,024, CourtCode: CC, CourtName: IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE, State: DE Delaware, UniqueCaseRef: DE>CC>00017024, Plaintiff: ISQUITH, Spelling, Viacom, Settlement, Parties, Stipulation, Agreement, Representatives, Entertainment, Delaware, Special Committee, Muething, Class Counsel, Directors, Merger Agreement, Proposals, Transaction, Television, William Haber, Consolidate, Delaware Corporation, Financial Advisor, Shareholders, Skadden Arps, Spelling Board, Recommend, Adequate, California, Subsidiaries, Releasing, Judgement, Common Stock, Hereby, Chancery Rule, Scheduling, Provisions, Redstone, Controlling, Accordance , ContentID: 120239582

Case Documents
1 2000-11-30 ORDER AND FINAL JUDGMENT
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 100299
7 pages
PDF
2 2000-10 STIPULATION AND AGREEMENT OF COMPROMISE SETTLEMENT AND RELEASE
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 100086
23 pages
PDF
3 1999-03-19 COMPLAINT
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 102038
7 pages
PDF
Total Documents: 3 documents , 37 pages
Price: $ 29.95


IVESLCD01 KGI0001
 
 

 Forgot your password?


1 . ORDER AND FINAL JUDGMENT

EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
SETTLEMENT
STIPULATION
PARTIES
REPRESENTATIVES
MEMBERS
RELEASING
JUDGEMENT
LAW
HEREBY
CHANCERY RULE
SCHEDULING
PROVISIONS
ACCORDANCE
DETERMINATION
DIRECTORS
ATTORNEYS
EVIDENCE
ADEQUATE
PURSUANT
MATTER
FACTS
DEFENDANTS
LIABILITY
RIGHTS
SUSPECT
PROCEEDING
UNKNOWN
TRANSACTIONS
DELAWARE
             IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE

                            IN AND FOR KEW CASTLE COUNTY

IN RE SPELLING ENTERTAINMENT                      1
GROUP, INC. SHAREHOLDERS                          ) Consol.  CA. No. 17024-NC
LITIGATION                                        >                                         /  .
                                                                                            s -
                               ORDER AND FINAL JUDGMENT
                               -    -                                                       c2
                                                                                             -4
               A hearing having been held before the Court on November 30, 2006:pursuant to the

Court's Order of September  29,200O  (the "Scheduling Order"), upon the Stipulation and Agreement

of Compromise, Settlement and Release submitted September 27, 2000 (the "Stipulation"), of the

above-captioned consolidated class action (the "Action"), which is incorporated herein by reference;

it appearing that clue notice of said hearing has been given in accordance with the aforesaid

Schedu1in.g  Order; the respective parties having appeared by their attorneys of record; the Court

having heard and considered evidence in  s:upport  of the proposed settlement (as defined in the

Stipulation); the attorneys for the respective parties having been heard; an opportunity to be heard

having been given to all other persons requesting to be heard in accordance with the Scheduling

Order; the Court having determined that the Notice of Pendency  of Class Action, Temporary and

Proposed Class Action Determination, Adequacy of Representation Determination, Proposed

Settlement of Class Action, Settlement Hearing, and Right to Appear (the "Notice"), pursuant to the

Scheduling Order, was adequate and sufficient; and the entire matter of the proposed Settlement

having been heard and considered by the Court;

                IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED  this

November, 2000, as follows:

               1.      The Court adopts and incorporates the definitions in the Stipulation for

purposes of this Order and Final Judgment.



SNIPPETS:
  • IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
  • Court's Order of September 29,200O (the "Scheduling Order"), upon the Stipulation and
  • of Compromise, Settlement and Release submitted September 27, 2000, of the
  • Stipulation); the attorneys for the respective parties having been heard; an opportunity to
  • having been given to all other persons requesting to be heard in accordance with the
  • Proposed Class Action Determination, Adequacy of Representation Determination, Proposed
  • Settlement of Class Action, Settlement Hearing, and Right to Appear, pursuant to the
  • was adequate and sufficient; and the entire matter of the proposed Settlement
  • IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED this
  • and full opportunity to be heard having been offered to all parties and to members of the
  • Class are bound by this Order and Final Judgment.
  • Chancery Rule 23 has been satisfied and the Action has been properly maintained according
  • impracticable, there are questions of law or fact common to the Class, the claims of the
  • and defendants have acted on grounds generally applicable to the
  • representatives, trustees, heirs, assigns or transferees, immediate and remote, and excluding
  • deemed to be evidence of, an admission or concession by any party or person herein with
  • any liability or wrongdoing whatsoever.
  • in the Action or in any court, tribunal or proceeding by or on behalf of any member of the
  • "Releasing Parties"), whether individual, class, derivative, representative, legal, equitable
  • directors, stockholders, representatives, employees, attorneys, consultants, accountants,
  • arisen, or which are related in arty manner to, the allegations, facts, events, transactions,
  • consideration of these transactions and all actions taken in furtherance thereof including,
  • or any appraisal rights arising out of the Merger.
  • WHICH THE CREDITOR DiOES NOT KNOW OR SUSPECT TO
  • In addition, each of the Releasing Parties also shall be deemed to waive any and all
  • States, or principle of common law, which governs or limits a person's release of unknown

  • 2 . STIPULATION AND AGREEMENT OF COMPROMISE SETTLEMENT AND RELEASE

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    VIACOM
    DEFENDANTS
    SETTLEMENT
    PARTIES
    COURT
    STIPULATION
    AGREEMENT
    REPRESENTATIVES
    ENTERTAINMENT
    SPECIAL COMMITTEE
    DELAWARE
    ATTORNEYS
    MUETHING
    CLASS COUNSEL
    MERGER AGREEMENT
    PROPOSALS
    DIRECTORS
    TELEVISION
    WILLIAM HABER
    CONSOLIDATE
    DELAWARE CORPORATION
    PLAINTIFFS
    FINANCIAL ADVISOR
    SKADDEN ARPS
    SPELLING BOARD
    RECOMMEND
    TRANSACTION
    CALIFORNIA
    SUBSIDIARIES
    
                   IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
    
                                 IN AND FOR NEW CASTLE COUNTY
    
    IN RE SPELLING ENTERTAINMENT
    GROUP, INC. SHAREHOLDERS                              onsol.  C.A. No. 17024-NC
    LITIGATION                                      1
    
                                 STIPULATION AND AGREEMENT                                       _
                          OF COMPROMISE, SETTLEMENT AND RELEASE                                 :` 2
                    The parties to the above-captioned consolidated civil action, by and through their
    
    respective attorneys, have entered into the following Stipulation and Agreement of Compromise,
    
    Settlement and Release (the "St:ipulation"),  subject to the approval of the Court of Chancery of
    
    State of Delaware (the "Court"):
    
                                                The Parties
    
                    A. Defendant Spelling Entertainment Group, Inc. ("Spelling" or the
    
    "Company") is a Delaware corporation with its principal executive offices in Los Angeles,
    
    California. Spelling is a holding company with subsidiaries that develop, produce and distribute
    
    television shows, movies, mini series and license entertainment rights.
    
                    B. Defendant Viacom Inc. ("Viacorn") is a Delaware corporation with its
    
    principal executive offices in New York, New York.
    
                    C. Defendants Sumner Redstone, Aaron Spelling, Philippe P. Dauman, Thomas
    
    E. Dooley, William Haber and John L. Muething were directors of Spelling during the period
    
    relevant to this action.
    
    
    
                                                Background
    
                   D.      Viacom acquired Paramount Communications Inc. ("Paramount") in July
    
    1994 and Blockbuster Entertainment Corporation ("Blockbuster") in September 1994. Viacom
    
    acquired an indirect controlling interest in Spelling through its acquisition of Blockbuster, which
    
    that time owned approximately `75% of Spelling's shares.
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
  • IN RE SPELLING ENTERTAINMENT
  • The parties to the above-captioned consolidated civil action,
  • respective attorneys, have entered into the following Stipulation and Agreement of Compromise,
  • Settlement and Release, subject to the approval of the Court of Chancery of the
  • "Company") is a Delaware corporation with its principal executive offices in Los Angeles,
  • Spelling is a holding company with subsidiaries that develop,
  • television shows, movies, mini series and license entertainment rights.
  • Defendants Sumner Redstone, Aaron Spelling, Philippe P. Dauman, Thomas
  • Viacom acquired Paramount Communications Inc. in July
  • Spelling entered into a seven-year licensing agreement with Artisan Home
  • Neither of these companies made any specific proposals to
  • Viacom rejected the proposal because the proposed transaction did not include the
  • March 18, 1999, the Board of Directors of Viacom approved the making of a proposal to the
  • Board formed a Special Committee comprised of Messrs.
  • John Muething and William Haber,
  • The Spelling Board authorized the Special Committee
  • Meagher & Flom LLP ("Skadden Arps") as special counsel to represent the Special Committee.
  • Later that day, members of the Special Committee met with representatives of Skadden Arps, who
  • Committee determined to retain Lazard F&es as financial advisor to the Special Committee based
  • of Viacom and informed them that the Special Committee was not willing to recommend the
  • Sterling and counsel representing certain plaintiffs in this Action ("Class Counsel")
  • their proposed changes on the draft merger agreement to Shearman &
  • rights and benefits of 9 1542 of I:he California Civil Code which provides:
  • merger or consolidate.

  • 3 . COMPLAINT

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    DEFENDANTS
    PLAINTIFF
    VIACOM
    SHAREHOLDERS
    TRANSACTION
    MEMBERS
    COMMON STOCK
    REDSTONE
    CONTROLLING
    SHARES
    FIDUCIARY DUTIES
    ADEQUATE
    PROPOSED TRANSACTION
    REPRESENTATION
    EXECUTIVE OFFICER
    CHAIRMAN
    REASONS
    PUBLIC STOCKHOLDERS
    DAMAGES
    PROTECT
    INDEPENDENT REPRESENTATION
    UNFAIR
    BUSINESSES
    BREACHING
    SPELLING ENTERTAINMENT GROUP
    ALLEGES
    COMMON STOCK OUTSTANDING
    CHIEF
    AFFECTING
    
                  IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
    
                                    IN AND FOR NEW CASTLE COUNTY
    -----_----------------------------------------------------------------X
    FRED T. ISQUITH,  on behalf of himself and all                       :     Civil Action No.
    others similarly situated,
    
                                       Plaintiff,
    
                                                                               CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
            V.
    
    SPELLING ENTERTAINMENT GROUP INC.,
    SUMNER REDSTONE, AARON SPELLING,
    PHILIPPE P. DOUMAN, THOMAS E. DOOLEY,
    WILLIAM HABER, JOHN L. MUETHING and
    VIACOM, INC.
                                     Defendants.
    ---------------_------------------------------------------------------x
    
                     Plaintiff, by his attorneys, alleges upon information and belief es$cept
    
    with respect to his ownership of Spelling Entertainment Group Inc. ("Sp&(@tg't@  the
                                                                                                   `.
    
    "Company") common stock, and his suitability to serve as a class representative,
    
    which is alleged upon personal knowledge, as follows:
    
                                                     PARTIES
    
                     1.       Plaintiff is the owner of shares of defendant Spelling.
    
                     2.       Spelling Entertainment Group Inc. is a Delaware corporation with
    
    executive offices at 5700 Wilshire Boulevard, Los Angeles, California 90036. Spelling
    
    is a holding company with subsidiaries which develop, produce and distribute television
    
    shows, moves and mini series; produce interactive video games and feature films; and
    
    license certain entertainment rights.                 As of November 11, 1998, Spelling had
    
    approximately 92,954,681 shares of common stock outstanding.
    
    
    
                 3.        Defendant Sumner H. Redstone has been Chairman of the Board
    
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • SPELLING ENTERTAINMENT GROUP INC., SUMNER REDSTONE, AARON SPELLING, PHILIPPE P. DOUMAN,
  • Plaintiff, by his attorneys, alleges upon information and belief es$cept
  • with respect to his ownership of Spelling Entertainment Group Inc. ("Sp&(@tg't@ the
  • "Company") common stock, and his suitability to serve as a class representative,
  • Plaintiff is the owner of shares of defendant Spelling.
  • Redstone served as Chairman of the Board of Viacom since 1987 and as Chief
  • Executive Officer of Viacom since January 1996.
  • Chief Administrative Officer and Secretary of Viacom since March
  • "Director Defendants"), owe fiduciary duties to Spelling and its public shareholders.
  • Viacom, as controlling shareholder of Spelling,
  • action is brought is so numerous that joinder of all class members is impracticable.
  • There were over 18 million public shares of Spelling common stock outstanding.
  • common to members of the Class and which predominate over any questions affecting
  • Accordingly, plaintiff is an adequate
  • representative of the Class and will fairly and adequately protect the interests of the
  • For the reasons stated herein, a class action is superior to other
  • The proposed transaction is wrongful, unfair and harmful to
  • Spelling's public stockholders, the Class members, and represents an attempt by
  • future earnings and profitable businesses.
  • toward plaintiff and the Class, and have breached, and are breaching, their fiduciary
  • safeguards for the interests of the class, including truly independent representation to
  • Class for all losses and damages suffered and to be suffered by them as a result of the
  •    |