LegalCaseDocs.com
shopping cart  
  |     
Search
 

 
New Visitors


 VeriSign Secure Site

 Get Adobe Reader

MALTZ v SFX ENTERTAINMENT Click to find out why . . .



Keywords & Phrases
CaseNo: C.A. No. 17,818, CourtName: A HEARING HAVING BEEN HELD BERORE THIS COURT (THE COURT ON AUGUST 29. 2000,, State: DE Delaware, UniqueCaseRef: DE>CC>00017818, CourtCode: CC, Plaintiff: MALTZ, Fees, Expenses, Award, Shareholders, Sfx Class, Merger, Settlement, Channel Common Stock, Common Stock, Reasonableness, Shares, Consolidation, Sfx, Defendant Sillerman, Merger Agreement, Llp, Special Committee, Transaction, Shell Oil, Representatives, Management, Proposed Settlement, Channel, Schiffrin Marc, Stock, Individual Defendants, Plaza East, Coordinated Actions, Certificate, Sillerman, Directors, Officers, Adequate, Vice President, Stockholders, Merger Consideration, Pursuant , ContentID: 120239676

Case Documents
1 2000-08-29 ORDER AND FINAL JUDGMENT
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 100197
5 pages
PDF
2 2000-08-24 PLAINTIFFS BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF PROPOSED SETTLEMENT AND APPLICATION FOR AWARD OFATTORNEYS FEES
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 102528
29 pages
PDF
3 2000-02 CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 101361
8 pages
PDF
Total Documents: 3 documents , 42 pages
Price: $ 29.95


IVESLCD01 KGI0001
 
 

 Forgot your password?


1 . ORDER AND FINAL JUDGMENT

EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
COORDINATED ACTIONS
COURT
REPRESENTATIVES
ATTORNEYS
PURSUANT
SCHEDULING ORDER
STIPULATION
MEMBERS
CHANCERY COURT
PLAINTIFFS
MERGER
TRANSACTION
CONSUMMATION
ADMINISTRATORS
ACCORDANCE
ADEQUATE
CHANCERY COURT RULE
BANKERS
PARTNERS
MODIFIED TRANSACTION
PROVIDELZI
AFORESAID SCHEDULING ORDER
PARTIES
MATTER
HEREBY
MANNER
COMPLIANCE
PROVISIONS
LAW
           I, `..
                            IN THE  CO:iJRT  OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
                I  '
                                                                IN AND FOR NEW CASTLE COUNTY

________  I __.._______________ I -__-_.___-_______--________ _ _-_---_  x


IN  RI:  SF:<  ENTERTAINhllENT, INC.                                                               
SHAREH:OI,DERS  LITIGATION                                                                         
1%NCbp'

_ _ _ _ _. ._ _ _. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ I _ _ _ - - - I _ - - - _ - - - - . - - - - - - - -
                                                                                                   

- _____.._..______I__  _ ..__-..-__------____---..----------------------  ?(


FRANKLIN ADVISERS, INC., et  al.>                                                                  
%

                                                        Plaintiffs.



ROBERT F.X.  SILLERMAN,   et al.,

                                                        Dcfe ndant:s.



                                                                     QRIER   AND  FINAL  JUDGMENT

                                   A hearing having been held berore this Court (the "Court") on

pursuant  10  the Court's Order of July 3, 2000 (the "Scheduling Order"), upon a Stipulation  `of

Settlement, filed on June 28, 2000 (the "Stipulation"), of the above-captioned actions (the

"Coordinated Actions"). which is incorporated herein by reference: it appearing that due notice

of said hearin?,  has been given in accordance with the aforesaid Scheduling Order, the respective

parties having appeared by their attorneys of record; the Court having heard and considered

cvidcnce in support of the proposed Settlement; the attorneys for their respective parties having

been  he;vd;  an opportunity to be heard having been given to all other persons requesting to be
SNIPPETS:
  • pursuant 10 the Court's Order of July 3, 2000, upon a Stipulation `of
  • Settlement, filed on June 28, 2000, of the above-captioned actions (the
  • of said hearin?, has been given in accordance with the aforesaid Scheduling Order, the
  • parties having appeared by their attorneys of record; the Court having heard and considered
  • cvidcnce in support of the proposed Settlement; the attorneys for their respective parties
  • Class preliminarily certified, pursuant to the aforesaid Scheduling Order, was
  • IT IS HEREBY 0FLERE:D.
  • The form and manner of notice given to the members of the Class (as
  • circumstances and to have been given in full compliance with the requirements of due process
  • B,ased on the record of the Coordinated Actions, each of the provisions Iof
  • Chancery Court Rule 23has been satisfied and the Coordinated Actions has been properly
  • and the repixsentative plaintiffs have fairly and adequately protected the interests
  • adequate and in the best.
  • Subject to consummation of the Merger.
  • and all claims, demands, rights, actions or causes of action under state or federal law,
  • past or present officers, directors, stockholders, representatives.
  • inveslment advisors, consuhants, a'ccountants, attorneys, investment bankers, commercial
  • partners or partnerships, personal representatives, estates, administrators, predecessors;
  • staternents, representations., misrepresentations, omissions or any other matter.
  • the Modified Transaction, the Merger: and any proxy material, public filings or
  • in connection with the Proposed Transaction or the Modified Transaction or the Merger
  • herein; providelzi.

  • 2 . PLAINTIFFS BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF PROPOSED SETTLEMENT AND APPLICATION FOR AWARD OFATTORNEYS FEES

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    COUNSEL
    FEES
    COURT
    EXPENSES
    AWARD
    ATTORNEYS
    SFX CLASS
    SHAREHOLDERS
    DEFENDANTS
    MERGER
    CHANNEL COMMON STOCK
    COMMON STOCK
    REASONABLENESS
    SETTLEMENT
    SHARES
    CONSOLIDATION
    DEFENDANT SILLERMAN
    MERGER AGREEMENT
    LLP
    SPECIAL COMMITTEE
    SHELL OIL
    TRANSACTION
    MANAGEMENT
    PROPOSED SETTLEMENT
    LITIGATION
    SCHIFFRIN MARC
    REPRESENTATIVES
    PLAZA EAST
    CERTIFICATE
    
                                                                               ORIGINAL
                 IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
                                IN AND FOR NEW CASTLE COUNTY
    
    
    IN RE SFX ENTERTAINMENT, INC.                             CONSOLIDATED
    SHAREHOLDERS LITIGATION                                   Civil Action No. 178 18-NC
    
    
    
    
                            PLAINTIFFS' BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF THE
                        PROPOSED SETTLEMENT AND JOINT APPLICATION                      r
                       FOR AN AWARD OF ATTORNEYS' FEES AND EXPENSES :
    
    
    
    
                                                ROSENTHAL, MONHAIT, GROSS  &.
                                                       & GODDESS, P.A.
                                                Joseph A.Rosenthal
                                                919 North Market Street, Suite 1401
                                                Wilmington, DE 1980 1
                                                (302) 656-4433
    
                                                Consolidated Plaintiffs' Liaison Counsel
    
    ABBEY, GARDY  & SQUITIERI, LLP
    Arthur N. Abbey
    *James S  Notis
    212 East 39th Street
    New York, NY 100 16
    (212) 889-3700
    
    SCHIFFRIN  & BARROWAY, LLP
    Richard S. Schiffrin
    Marc A. Topaz
    Three Elala Plaza East, Suite 400
    Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004-3481
    (610) 6167-7706
    
    WECHSLER  HARWOOD
      HALEBIAN  & FEFFER LLP
    Robert I. Hanvood
    Samuel K. Rosen
    488 Madison Avenue
    New York, NY 10022
    (212) 9:35-7400
    
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
  • FOR AN AWARD OF ATTORNEYS' FEES AND EXPENSES:
  • ABBEY, GARDY & SQUITIERI, LLP
  • Richard S. Schiffrin Marc A. Topaz
  • Three Elala Plaza East, Suite 400
  • Consolidated Plaintiffs' Co-Lead Counsel
  • In the Matter of the Annraisal of Shell Oil Co.,
  • In Re Corporate Software Inc. Shareholders Litig.,
  • ofthe proposed settlement ofthis Action,' pursuant to a Stipulation
  • "Company") in connection with the Company's merger with Clear Channel Communications,
  • billion in Clear Channel common stock.
  • each share of SFX Class A common stock was to be exchanged for 0.6 shares of Clear Channel
  • The constituent actions charged, among other things, that defendants breached their
  • The Franklin Action also alleged that, by entering into the merger agreement, SFX's
  • Certificate of Incorporation to permit the uneven allocation of the Merger consideration.
  • :particullarly defendant Sillerman, had agreed to Clear Channel's demands which might have
  • , a management director of SFX, Paul Kramer, an outside director of SFX who served on
  • the Board's Special Committee, and Jason Glen Cahilly, an investment banker at Lehman
  • Consideration on Merger; Consolidation,
  • Backmound of the Transaction
  • representatives of SFX and Clear Channel first met to discuss
  • intimately familiar with the facts and circumstances pertinent to this litigation.

  • 3 . CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    SFX
    PLAINTIFF
    CHANNEL
    STOCK
    INDIVIDUAL DEFENDANTS
    MERGER
    SILLERMAN
    DIRECTORS
    OFFICERS
    VICE PRESIDENT
    STOCKHOLDERS
    MEMBERS
    SHAREHOLDERS
    MERGER CONSIDERATION
    ENTERTAINMENT
    SHARES
    COUNSEL
    CONTROLS
    ALLOCATING
    DAMAGES
    ADEQUATE
    AGREEMENT
    PROPOSED MERGER
    NEGOTIATIONS
    BREACH
    COURT
    COMMUNICATIONS
    COMMON
    EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT
    
            IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
                         IN AND FOR NEW CASTLE COUNTY
    
    
    ALAN MALTZ,
    
                      Plaintiff,               CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
         -against-
    
    SFX ENTERTAINMENT, INC., ROBERT
    F.X. SILLERMAN, D. GEOFFREY
    ARMSTRONG, HOWARD J. TYTEL,
    RICHARD A. LIESE, JAMES F.
    O'GRADY, JR., PAUL KRAMER,
    JOHN D. MILLER, BRIAN BECKER,
    DAVID FALK, MICHAEL G. FERREL,
    THOMAS P. BENSON, EDWARD F.
    DUGAN and CLEAR CHANNEL
    COMMUNICATIONS, INC.,
    
                      Defendants.                                       _ :
    -----------------------------------x
    
              Plaintiff alleges upon information and belief, except as
    
    to paragraph 1 which plaintiff alleges upon knowledge, as follows:
    
              1.      Plaintiff is a holder of shares of Class A common
    
    stock of the SFX Entertainment, Inc. ("SFX" or the "Companyl') .
    
              2.      SFX is a corporation duly organized and existing
    
    under the laws of the state of Delaware.        SFX is a diversified
    
    promoter, producer, and venue operator for live entertainment
    
    events. The Company's venues are used primarily for music concerts
    
    and other live entertainment events. SFX also develops and manages
    
    touring Broadway shows and represents athletes and broadcasters for
    contract and marketing services.
    
              3.      Defendant Clear Channel Communications, Inc. ("Clear
    
    Channel") is a diversified media company with operations in
    
    broadcasting and outdoor advertising.           Clear    Channel           owns,
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
  • Plaintiff alleges upon information and belief,
  • Plaintiff is a holder of shares of Class A common
  • stock of the SFX Entertainment,
  • Defendant Clear Channel Communications,
  • Defendant Robert F.X. Sillerman is the
  • Chairman of the SFX Board of Directors.
  • its Executive Vice President, General Counsel and Secretary.
  • The defendants named in paragraphs 4 through 15 are
  • to plaintiff a:nd the other public stockholders of SFX,
  • any individual Class members, including:
  • plaintiff is an adequate representative of the Class and will
  • Defendant Sillerman owns or controls 89.8 percent of SFX
  • Sillerman and the remaining officers and directors
  • entered into a definitive merger agreement with Clear Channel
  • The Proposed Merger will also trigger certain change
  • Individual Defendants to exercise stock options valued in the
  • SFX's minority shareholders were not
  • Individual Defendants were desirous of allocating to themselves as
  • entire fairness in allocating the merger consideration.
  • the negotiations and compromised the undivided loyalty which the
  • breach their fiduciary duties owed to plaintiffs and the other
  • rescinding the same or awarding rescissory damages
  •    |