LegalCaseDocs.com
shopping cart  
  |     
Search
 

 
New Visitors


 VeriSign Secure Site

 Get Adobe Reader

STATE OF WISCONSIN INVESTMENT BOARD v MEDCO RESEARCH Click to find out why . . .



Keywords & Phrases
CaseNo: C.A. No. 17,727, CourtCode: CC, CourtName: IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATIE OF DELAWARE, Plaintiff: STATE OF WISCONSIN INVESTMENT BOARD, State: DE Delaware, UniqueCaseRef: DE>CC>00017727, Medco, Merger, Shareholders, King, Fee, Defendants Deny, Swib, Allegations, Paragraph, Stock, Williams, Fees, Exchange Ratio, Del, Defendants Admit, Price, Disclosures, Motion, Award, Vote, Seinfeld, Fee Award, Lawsuit, Proxy, Agreement, Disclosure, King Stock, Medco Stockholders, Directors, Grant, Transaction, Supplemental Disclosures, Prejudice, Corrective Disclosures, Wisconsin Investment, Stock Price, Common Stock, Delaware, Chancellor, Shares, Medco Board, Litigation Costs, Complaint , ContentID: 120239687

Case Documents
1 2002-04-09 LETTER OPINION
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 131710
16 pages
PDF
2 2001-01-29 PLAINTIFFS SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR AWARD OF ATTORNEYS FEES
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 102586
12 pages
PDF
3 2001-01-25 DEFENDANTS SUPPLEMENTAL MEMORANDUM
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 102587
19 pages
PDF
4 2000-06-15 PLAINTIFFS REPLY BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR AN AWARD OF ATTORNEYS FEES AND COSTS AND FOR VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 102588
23 pages
PDF
5 2000-04-19 PLAINTIFFS BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF ITS MOTION FOR AN AWARD OF ATTORNEYS FEES AND COSTS AND FOR DISMISSAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 102589
34 pages
PDF
6 2000-02-24 MEMORANDUM OPINION
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 100213
27 pages
PDF
7 2000-02-18 ANSWER
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 101447
17 pages
PDF
8 2000-02-17 SWIBS SECOND MOTION FOR PRELIM. INJUNCTION
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 102590
8 pages
PDF
9 2000-02-09 ORDER
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 100214
6 pages
PDF
10 2000-01-10 MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS MOTION FOR EXPEDITED PROCEEDINGS
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 102591
18 pages
PDF
11 2000-01-10 VERIFIED COMPLAINT
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 101448
26 pages
PDF
Total Documents: 11 documents , 206 pages
Price: $ 69.95


IVESLCD01 KGI0001
 
 

 Forgot your password?


1 . LETTER OPINION

EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
STOCK
EXCHANGE RATIO
MERGER
AGREEMENT
LAWSUIT
COURT
COUNSEL
ATTORNEYS
MEDCO SHAREHOLDERS
SWIB
REQUEST
STOCK PRICE
PLAINTIFF
MARKET
KING STOCK
LITIGATION
STOCKHOLDERS
WISCONSIN INVESTMENT
TRANSACTION
PURPORTED CLASS ACTION
WISCONSIN INVESTMENT BOARD
AVERAGE TRADING PERIOD
HOURLY CHARGES
KING SHARES
DEFENDANTS
DISCLOSURES
ACCORDING
WILMINGTON
EISENHOFER
                                         COURT OF  CHANCERY
                                                OF THE
                                          STATE OF  DELAWARE
Wtw B. C-R III                      Submitted: January 2 1,200  1                            PO.
   CMNCEUOR                            Decided: April  9,2002                         GEORGETW  
                                                                                       ~~HONE 
                                                                                        FASCIMIU 


     VIA FAX  & U.S. MAIL

     Stuart M. Grant                                      A. Gilchrist Sparks, III
     Cynthia A. Calder                                    Alan J. Stone
     Megan  D. McIntyre                                   Morris, Nichols, Arsht  & Tunnel1
     John C. Kairis                                       P.O. Box 1347
     Denise T.  DiPersio                                  Wilmington, DE 19899
     Grant  & Eisenhofer, P.A.
      1220 N. Market Street, Suite 500
     Wilmington, DE 19801

     Edward M. McNally
     Morris James  Hitchens   & Williams LLP
     222 Delaware Ave., P.O. Box 2306
     Wilmington, Delaware 19899

                     Re:    State  of  Wisconsin Investment Board v. Bartlett, et al.
                            Civil Action No. 17727

     Dear Counsel:

               This is the Court's decision on an application for attorneys' fees in this

     purported class action lawsuit. The lawsuit effectively ended on February 24,

     2000, when this Court denied a request to enjoin a proposed merger. After the

     Court's decision, stockholders approved the merger and the transaction was

     consummated on February 25,200O.  Stock of the acquirer  company was thereafter

     distributed in exchange for all of the stock of the target company. Attorneys for

     the plaintiff, who failed to achieve their goal of stopping the merger from taking


merger agreement provided a formula for the exchange ratio that included a two-

sided collar, with a floor of $22.50 and a ceiling of $34. The pricing formula was

SNIPPETS:
  • Grant & Eisenhofer, P.A. 1220 N. Market Street, Suite 500
  • Wilmington, Delaware 19899
  • State of Wisconsin Investment Board v. Bartlett,
  • This is the Court's decision on an application for attorneys' fees in this
  • purported class action lawsuit.
  • The lawsuit effectively ended on February 24,
  • when this Court denied a request to enjoin a proposed merger.
  • stockholders approved the merger and the transaction was
  • distributed in exchange for all of the stock of the target company.
  • merger agreement provided a formula for the exchange ratio that included a twosided collar,
  • if King's twenty-day average stock price fell below $33 or rose
  • It is a "theoretical" increase in value because a Medco shareholder could not have sold his
  • protect Medco shareholders from a real downside value of less than $22.50 per
  • In connection with its request for fees, G&E offers two explanations for why
  • no class was ever certified in this litigation.
  • it does not appear that SWJB's counsel formally moved for class certification.
  • No class will ever be certified in this lawsuit, as SWIB has now moved to dismiss the action
  • The proposed class-wide benefit, according to this theory, is
  • it negotiated a fee agreement with G&E.
  • guarantee that G&E received 100% of its hourly charges plus expenses.
  • Defendants argue that SWIB and G&E are not entitled to any fees or
  • requesting additional compensation for the non-monetary benefits conferred by SWlB's
  • The fact is that the King shares were not distributed to the Medco
  • over the newly calculated average trading period.
  • would be appropriate to award a special fee to a representative plaintiff in a class

  • 2 . PLAINTIFFS SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR AWARD OF ATTORNEYS FEES

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    SWIB
    DEFENDANTS
    MEDCO
    KING
    SEINFELD
    ATTORNEYS
    COURT
    LITIGATION
    AWARD
    PLAINTIFFS
    SHARES
    MEDCO STOCKHOLDERS
    COUNSEL
    MOTION
    MERGER
    JOHNSON AFF
    CORRECTIVE DISCLOSURES
    KING STOCK
    FEE AGREEMENT
    STATE OFWISCONSIN INVESTMENT
    MARKET PRICE
    EXCHANGE RATIO
    NEGOTIATE
    CHANCELLOR
    INJUNCTION
    LEGAL FEE
    GRANT AFF
    AVERAGE PRICE
    SUPPLEMENTAL MEMORANDUM
    
               IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
                                IN AND FOR NEW CASTLE COUNTY
    
    STATE OF WISCONSIN INVESTMENT
    BOARD, on behalf of itself and all others
    similarly situated,
                                                 1
                           Plaintiff,
                                                 i
                    V.                                  Civil Action No. 17727-NC
                                                 ;
    WILLIAM BARTLETT, JAY N. COHN,
    MARK B. HIRSCH, EUGENE L. STEP,              i
    RICHARD C. WILLIAMS, and MEDCO                                                         c
    RESEARCH, INC.,                                                              : .:
                                                 1                                         -,._
                                                                          y;, Il.1
                                                                          :.-.*I           I. -
                                                                             *  `)
                                                                          i<..)
                           Defendants.           i                        :-               ..  _       
                                                                          :  .~                 r.,    
                                                                          -..                   ZL,    
                                                                                                       
            PLAINTIFF'S SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF ITS~&jTION<~;                                 
             FOR AN AWARD OF ATTORNEYS' FEES AND LITIGATION -CXX3TS
                                                                           -.-.                 ~
                                                                                   ..i
                                                                                   - .I         c.z
    
    
    
    
    Dated: January  29,200l                      Stuart M. Grant
                                                 Megan D. McIntyre
                                                 Cynthia A. Calder
                                                 John C. Kairis
                                                 Denise T. DiPersio
                                                 GRANT & EISENHOFER, P.A.
                                                 1220 N. Market St., Suite 500
                                                 Wilmington, DE 1980 1
                                                 (302) 622-7000
    
                                                 ATTORNEYS FOR THE STATE
                                                 OF WISCONSIN INVESTMENT BOARD
    
    
    
                                          PRELIMINARY STATEMENT
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
  • FOR AN AWARD OF ATTORNEYS' FEES AND LITIGATION -CXX3TS
  • Plaintiff, the State ofwisconsin Investment Board, did not understand the Court's
  • December 15,2000, letter as an invitation to Defendants Medco Research, Inc. and King
  • December 4 in Seinfeld v. Coker."
  • However, in the interest of fairness and balance, SWIB submits
  • this supplemental memorandum in further support of its motion for an award of attorneys' fees
  • "Motion") and in response to Defendants' Supplemental Brief.
  • That is the increase in the number of shares that were
  • issued to Medco stockholders in the merger between King and Medco due to SWIB's
  • Finally, with regard to the hourly rate, Defendants bandy about that the fee requested by
  • SWIB and its counsel would result in a rate $56 18 per hour rate.3 What Defendants fail to
  • sophisticated shareholders are able to negotiate competitive legal fee arrangements,
  • THE LITIGATION CREATED A SUBSTANTIAL MONETARY BENEFIT
  • See_ Johnson Aff.
  • Instead, because ofthe injunction that SWIB obtained, Medco stockholders
  • 946,930 m shares of King stock because of the injunction that SWIB obtained.
  • that stock cannot be sold at a 20-day average price, but only at the then-existing market
  • Chance In The Exchange Ratio
  • See Grant Aff.
  • the fee requested is supported by the factors set forth by the Chancellor in Seinfeld
  • counsel filed a complaint on behalf of certain individual plaintiffs and then very
  • negotiated the fee agreement with its counsel, Grant & Eisenhofer, P.A.
  • SWIB set out to negotiate a fee with G&E that would be on the low end of the range of fees
  • DEFENDANTS ADMIT THAT A FEE AWARD IS APPROPRIATE FOR SWIB'S EFFORTS IN FORCING MEDCO TO MAKE

  • 3 . DEFENDANTS SUPPLEMENTAL MEMORANDUM

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    FEE AWARD
    MEDCO
    SEINFELD
    COURT
    LAWSUIT
    CHANCELLOR
    PLAINTIFFS
    FEE REQUEST
    COUNSEL
    LITIGATION
    MERGER
    SHAREHOLDERS
    INCENTIVES
    RISK
    DEFENDANT
    FUTURE PLAINTIFFS
    SWIB
    KING SHARES
    MEMORANDUM
    SUPPLEMENTAL DISCLOSURES
    MERGER AGREEMENT
    EXCHANGE RATIO
    ATTORNEYS
    VOLUNTARY CORPORATE ACTION
    MERGER CONSIDERATION
    PETITIONER
    SETTLEMENT
    STOCK PRICE
    HOURLY RATE
    
                  IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
                               IN AND FOR NEW CASTLE COUNTY
    
     STATE OF WISCONSIN                            >
     INVESTMENT BOARD,
                                                   :
                            Plaintiff,             >) Civil Action No. 17727
            V.
                                                   i
     MEDCO RESEARCH, INC. et al.
                                    ,--
                                                   ;                                           -?;
                            Defendants.            )                                      ,
    
    
                   DEFENDANT'S SUPPLEMENTAL  MEMORANDUti                             :
    
                    Defendant  Medco Research, Inc. submits this memorandum
    
    addressing the Chancellor's opinion in Seinfeld v. Coker, a case in which the
    
    petitioner  - much like Grant & Eisenhofer ("G&E") in this case - sought a
    
    grossly excessive fee award. Applying the Supreme Court's Sugarland factors,
    
    the Seinfeld court drastically reduced a fee request where the petitioner sought a
    
    fee of $263 1 per hour, an amount the Court found "much more than necessary to
    
    maximize future plaintiffs' incentives to bring meritorious cases and to litigate
    
    them efficiently." Seinfeld v. Coker, 2000 WL 1800214 at "6.
    
                    Recognizing that "such a high fee overcompensates plaintiffs'
    
    counsel for the risk they faced in bringing this lawsuit," I/ the Chancellor cut the
    
    Seinfeld petitioner's fee request in half - to $250,000 - to avoid "increas[ing]  the
    
    threat of inefficient litigation by conferring a too generous hourly rate."  Id. The
    
    Court reached this result even though, unlike this case, there was no question
    
    
    If     Unlike Seinfeld, G&E bore little risk in this case. Its retainer agreement
    with SWIB guaranteed payment of at least, half of G&E's hourly charges, plus &l
    expenses  See Defendant's Memorandum In Opposition To Plaintiffs Motion For An
    Award of Attorneys' Fees and Costs and For Voluntary Dismissal, filed June 1, 2000
    ("Opp."), at 34; Retainer Letter from G&E (Ex. 8 to Opp.).
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
  • MEDCO RESEARCH, INC. et al.
  • Defendant Medco Research, Inc. submits this memorandum
  • addressing the Chancellor's opinion in Seinfeld v. Coker,
  • grossly excessive fee award.
  • the Seinfeld court drastically reduced a fee request where the petitioner sought a
  • maximize future plaintiffs' incentives to bring meritorious cases and to litigate
  • Recognizing that "such a high fee overcompensates plaintiffs'
  • counsel for the risk they faced in bringing this lawsuit," I/ the Chancellor cut the
  • Seinfeld petitioner's fee request in half - to $250,000 - to avoid "increasthe
  • threat of inefficient litigation by conferring a too generous hourly rate."
  • G&E bore little risk in this case.
  • regardless of the resulting hourly rate conferred
  • In this case, SWIB failed to
  • merger, lost its proxy fight, and now seeks to abandon its lawsuit, along with the
  • Medco shareholders it claimed to represent.
  • litigation caused no change in the Merger Agreement,
  • January 31 supplemental disclosures, prompted no voluntary corporate action by
  • 21 The only voluntary corporate action that SWIB and G&E can arguably identify is the
  • reduced to avoid bestowing a $5,618 per hour "windfall" on G&E's attorneys.
  • The Chancellor rejected this approach,
  • million settlement for shareholders.
  • wholesome incentives with which we are concerned.
  • the merger consideration was actually fixed by the Merger Agreement at $34 per
  • To the extent Medco shareholders received any more King shares on February 25
  • Indeed, in Paragraph 39 of its Complaint, SWIB describes the purpose and effect of the
  • intervening subsequent events, such as the change in King's stock price, over

  • 4 . PLAINTIFFS REPLY BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR AN AWARD OF ATTORNEYS FEES AND COSTS AND FOR VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    DEFENDANTS
    FEE
    EXCHANGE RATIO
    MEDCO
    COURT
    SHAREHOLDERS
    DEL
    MERGER
    SUPPLEMENTAL DISCLOSURES
    MOTION
    AWARD
    ATTORNEYS
    PREJUDICE
    LITIGATION
    KING STOCK
    PRICE
    FEE AGREEMENT
    WILLIAMS DEP
    DELAWARE
    WISCONSIN INVESTMENT
    HARTNETT
    STOCKHOLDERS
    PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
    JOHNSON DEP
    CHANCERY
    SHAREHOLDER VOTE
    LITIGATION COSTS
    PRICING PERIOD
    COMMON FUND
    
               IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF TH[E STATE OF DELAWARE
                                 IN AND FOR NEW CASTlLE  COUNTY
    
    STATE OF WISCONSIN INVESTMENT
    BOARD, on behalf of itself and all others     ;
    similarly situated,
                                                  ;
                            Plaintiff,            >
    
                   V.                             i      Civil Action No. 17727-NC
                                                                                        52  ,_/
    WILLIAM BARTLETT, JAY N. COHN,                ;                                     -:
                                                                             C'  /  :  -'              
                                                                             .-
    MARK B. HIRSCH, EUGENE L. STEP,                                          .--               7       
                                                                             -_.:-.  2                 
    RICHARD C. WILLIAMS, and MEDCO                                                                 _
                                                  i                                           _.-      
    RESEARCH, INC.,                                                               .,          c.7
                                                                                  .
                                                  ;                                .
                            Defendants.           >
    
    
                   PLAINTIFF'S REPLY BRIEF IN SUP'PORT  OF ITS MOTION
             FOR AN AWARD OF ATTORNEYS' FEES AND LITIGATION COSTS
                  AND FOR VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE
    
    
    
    
    Dated: June 15, 2000                          Stuart M. Grant
                                                  Cynthia A. Calder
                                                  Megan D. McIntyre
                                                  John C. K.airis
                                                  Denise T. DiPersio
                                                  GRANT & EISENHOFER, P.A.
                                                  12Z!O N. Market St Suite 500
                                                  Wilmington, DE  16801
                                                  (302) 622-7000
    
                                                  ATTORNEYS FOR THE STATE
                                                  OF WISCONSIN INVESTMENT BOARD
    
    
    
                                                      TABLE OF CONTIm                                  
    
    TABLEOFAUTHORITIES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF TH[E STATE OF DELAWARE
  • PLAINTIFF'S REPLY BRIEF IN SUP'PORT OF ITS MOTION FOR AN AWARD OF ATTORNEYS' FEES AND
  • AND FOR VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE
  • THAT SWIB CAUSED THE INCREASE IN THE MERGER
  • The Increase In Exchange Ratio
  • SWIB'S FEE AGREEMENT IS THE MIDST APPROPRIATE
  • DEFENDANTS HAVE NOT ADVANCED ANY LEGITIMATE
  • In re Bank One Shareholders Class Actions,
  • WL 19472, Hartnett, V.C.
  • Inc., Del.
  • State of Wisconsin Investment Board submits this reply in further support of its
  • There has been no objection to SWIB's Petition or Motion from any Medco stockholder.
  • Court preventing the shareholder vote on the merger between Medco Research,
  • SWIB's complaint, its briefing in support of its Motion for Preliminary Injunction,,
  • that shareholders had to receive the supplemental disclosures.
  • Citations to "Williams Dep."
  • achieving a benefit for the stockholders, plaintiffs counsel is entitled to a fee.
  • Medco was unwilling to acknowledge that a new pricing period had to be used
  • "Johnson Dep."
  • prescience into the market forces which affected King',3 stock price.
  • Medco's financial adviser, Hambrecht & Quist, advised the board that "King stock
  • SWIB'S FEE AGREEMENT IS THE MOST APPROPRIATE GUIDANCE FOR A FEE AWARP
  • (arm's-length negotiation with counsel is best manner to determine fees in common fund case).

  • 5 . PLAINTIFFS BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF ITS MOTION FOR AN AWARD OF ATTORNEYS FEES AND COSTS AND FOR DISMISSAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    DEFENDANTS
    DISCLOSURES
    MEDCO
    PROXY
    COURT
    ATTORNEYS
    GRANT
    LITIGATION
    MOTION
    AWARD
    SWIB
    SHAREHOLDERS
    CORRECTIVE DISCLOSURES
    MERGER
    WILLIAMS
    EXCHANGE RATIO
    PRELIMINARYSTATEMENT
    LITIGATION COSTS
    PREJUDICE
    PROPOSED CLASS
    KING STOCK
    PRICING PERIOD
    SHAREHOLDER VOTE
    PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION MOTION
    AVERAGE PRICE
    GRANT AFF
    MERGER AGREEMENT
    INCREASED EXCHANGE RATIO
    SUPPLEMENT
    
               IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
                                  IN AN-D FOR NEW CASTLE COUNTY
    
    STATE OF WISCONSIN INVESTMENT                  1
    BOARD, on behalf of itself and all others
    similarly situated,                            ;
    
                             Plaintiff,            ;
    
                    V.                             i      Civil Action No. 17727-NC
    
    WILLIAM BARTLETT, JAY N. COHN,                 i
    MARK B. HIRSCH, EUGENE L. STEP,               >
    RICHARD C. WILLIAMS, and MEDCO
    RESEARCH, INC.,                                1
    
                             Defendants.
    
    
                           PLAINTIFF'S BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF ITS MOTION
             FOR AN AWARD OF ATTORNEYS' FEES AND LITIGATION COSTS
                  AND FOR VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE
    
    
    
    
    Dated: April  19,200O Stuart M. Grant
                                                   Cynthia A. Calder
                                                   Megan D. McIntyre
                                                   John C. Kairis
                                                   Denise T. DiPersio
                                                   GRANT  & EISENHOFER, P.A.
                                                   1220 N. Market St., Suite 500
                                                   Wilmington, DE 19801
                                                   (302) 622-7000
    
                                                   ATTORNEYS FOR THE STATE
                                                   OF WISCONSIN INVESTMENT BOARD
    
    
    
                                               TABLE OF CONTENTS
    
                                                                                                       
    
    TABLE OF AUTHORITIES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . .
    
    PRELIMINARYSTATEMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
    
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
  • RICHARD C. WILLIAMS, and MEDCO
  • PLAINTIFF'S BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF ITS MOTION FOR AN AWARD OF ATTORNEYS' FEES AND LITIGATION
  • AND FOR VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE
  • PRELIMINARYSTATEMENT
  • The Proxy and the Corrective Disclosures.
  • The Board's Approval of the Merger
  • SWIB Achieves A Significantly Increased Exchange Ratio,.
  • SWIB Forces The Medco Board To Reexamine The Merger
  • The Corrective Disclosures And Increased Exchange
  • Clavton Shareholders Lit&., Del.
  • Defendants were forced to issue supplemental disclosures to correct the false and misleading
  • information they had presented to the Proposed Class.
  • SWIB was also successful in having the shareholder vote enjoined for 15 days.
  • insistence that the pricing period be moved caused the 20 day average to be calculated on
  • After full briefing on the preliminary injunction motion,
  • (Grant Aff at 1 11 and Exhibit D).'

  • 6 . MEMORANDUM OPINION

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    MEDCO
    MERGER
    PLAINTIFF
    VOTE
    KING
    DISCLOSURE
    COURT
    MEDCO BOARD
    DEFENDANTS
    LOYALTY
    ENJOIN
    ALLEGATIONS
    WILLIAMS
    PROPOSED MERGER
    INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
    CARE
    REASONABLENESS
    PHARMACEUTICALS
    CONSUMMATION
    PLAINTIFFS REQUEST
    FIDUCIARY DUTIES
    INFORMED DECISION
    SUPPLEMENT
    BUSINESS JUDGMENT
    MERGER AGREEMENT
    SELF-INTEREST
    POTENTIAL SUITORS
    PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
    ORIGINAL PROXY
    
          IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATIE  OF DELAWARE
    
                           IN AND FOR NEW CASTLE COUNTY                           `$%.a3
    STATE OF WISCONSIN INVESTMENT )                                         1'         i i ~ -\
                                                                                                r/__
                                                                        -">  1  -:>  q  )  `
    BOARD, on behalf of itself and all others      )                   i  i  : 0 `i .2+~..- i`r \
    similarly situated,                            >                  D.`!$ I` 7r ; ..,! c f r
                                                   >
                 Plaintiff,                        >
                                                   >
    V.                                             ) CA. No. 17727
                                                   >
    WILLIAM BARTLETT, JAY N. COHN,                 )
    MARK Bl. HIRSCH, EUGENE L. STEP,               )
    RICHARD C. WILLIAMS, and MEDCO                 )
    RESEARCH, INC.,                                >>
                 Defendants.                       >
    
                                Submitted: February  9,200O
                                Decided: February  24,200O
    
                                MEMORANDUM OPINION
    
    Stuart M. Grant, Cynthia A. Calder, Megan  D. McIntyre, John C. Kairis and
    Denise T.  DiPersio of Grant  & Eisenhofer, Wilmington, Delaware.
    Attorneys for Plaintiff.
    
    A. Gilchrist Sparks, III, Alan J. Stone, S. Mark Hurd and Jessica Zeldin of
    Morris, Nichols, Arsht  & Tunnell, Wilmington, Delaware. OF COUNSEL:
    James R. Daly, Lee Ann Russo and Robert C. Micheletto of Jones, Day,
    Reavis & Pogue, Chicago, Illinois. Attorneys for Defendants.
    
    
    
    STEELE:, V.C.
    
    
    
          Plaintiff brings this action, on behalf of itself and all others who own
    
    Medco common stock, to enjoin a shareholder vote on the proposed merger
    
    between Medco Research Inc. ("Medco") and King Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
    
    ("King") and to enjoin the merger's consummation.
    
          Plaintiffs request for injunctive relief is based on allegations of
    
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATIE OF DELAWARE
  • Plaintiff brings this action, on behalf of itself and all others who own
  • Medco common stock, to enjoin a shareholder vote on the proposed merger
  • between Medco Research Inc. and King Pharmaceuticals,
  • merger are not enjoined than the defendants will suffer if they are.
  • that their decisions are entitled to the benefit of the business judgment rule
  • negligence; did not maximize the interests of the shareholders; did
  • reasonable shareholders to make an informed decision as part of the total
  • plaintiffs request for preliminary injunctive relief is
  • Williams is the Chairman of Medco's board of directors.
  • Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and enjoin the merger's consummation.
  • The Medco board voted to appoint its Chairman, Williams, to
  • omissions and mischaracterized statements contained in the original proxy
  • 2000 to supplement and/or correct the disclosures contained in the original
  • Plaintiff requests injunctive relief based on allegations of corporate
  • waste and breach of the fiduciary duties of care, loyalty, and disclosure.
  • issuance of a preliminary injunction and is, therefore, entitled to relief.
  • recommend this merger agreement.
  • Plaintiffs allegations of self-interest do not meet the threshold
  • not invariably control whether or not potential suitors wished to negotiate.
  • any disputes concerning the reasonableness of the time period to

  • 7 . ANSWER

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    PARAGRAPH
    ALLEGATIONS
    DEFENDANTS ADMIT
    MEDCO
    KING
    WILLIAMS
    STOCK
    COMPLAINT
    AGREEMENT
    COMMON STOCK
    PROXY STATEMENT
    RESPONSE
    MERGER
    COURT
    RESPECTFULLY REFER
    WISCONSIN INVESTMENT
    DEFENDANTS WILLIAM BARTLETT
    PLAINTIFF
    DIRECTORS
    FIRST SENTENCE
    STOCK PRICE
    CLASS ACTION
    MEDCO RESEARCH
    NEGOTIATIONS
    SECOND SENTENCE
    ACCURATE TERMS
    SWIB PURPORTS
    THIRD SENTENCES
    DELAWARE
    
                   IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
    
                                    IN AND FOR NEW CASTLE COUNTY
    
    
     STATE OF WISCONSIN INVESTMENT
     BOARD, on behalf of itself and all others
     similarly situated,                                 ;                           i-
                             Plaintiff,                  >                                   .
             V.                                          i Civil Action No. 17727
                                                                                                  -I
     WILLIAM BARTLETT, JAY N. COHN,                      1
     MARK B. HIRSCH, EUGENE L. STEP,
     RICHARD C. WILLIAMS, and MEDCO                      i
     RESEARCH, INC.,                                     >
    
                             Defendants.                 1
    
    
                                                  ANSWER
    
                    Defendants William Bartlett ("Bartlett"), Jay N. Cohn ("Cohn"), Mark B. Hirsch
    
    ("Hirsch"), Eugene L. Step ("Step"), Richard C. Williams ("Williams"), and Medco Research,
    
    Inc. ("Medco") (collectively, the "Defendants"), by their undersigned attorneys, for their answer
    
    to the verified complaint ("Complaint") filed by plaintiff, State of Wisconsin Investment Board
    
    ("SWIB"),  state as follows:
    
                    1.      Defendants deny the allegations contained in paragraph 1, except admit
    
    that on or about December 1, 1999, Medco issued a press release announcing its agreement to
    
    merge with King Pharmaceuticals, Inc. ("King") and for a further answer, respectfully refer the
    
    Court to that press release for its full and correct contents.
    
                    2.      Defendants admit only that the December 29, 1999 Proxy Statement
    
    ("Proxy Statement") states that Medco's common stock closed at $27.25 per share on
    
    November 30, 1999. Defendants deny all remaining allegations in paragraph 2.
    
    
    
                   3.     Defendants admit only that the proposed merger contemplates a stock-for-
    
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
  • Defendants William Bartlett, Jay N. Cohn, Mark B. Hirsch
  • to the verified complaint filed by plaintiff, State of Wisconsin Investment Board
  • that on or about December 1, 1999, Medco issued a press release announcing its agreement to
  • merge with King Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and for a further answer, respectfully refer the
  • Court to that press release for its full and correct contents.
  • Defendants admit only that the December 29, 1999 Proxy Statement
  • Defendants deny all remaining allegations in paragraph 2.
  • Defendants admit only that the proposed merger contemplates a stock-for-stock transaction.
  • To the extent a response is required,
  • Medco President and Chief Executive Officer effective July 1, 1999, admit that Williams was
  • experience in negotiating and completing transactions, the board of directors of Medco
  • that Williams act as a representative of Medco in any negotiations regarding a strategic
  • stock will be converted into the right to receive a portion of a share of King common stock
  • on an exchange ratio determined as set forth in the merger agreement.
  • allegations in the second sentence of paragraph 9, including subparts a-e, purport to
  • Defendants admit only that SWIB purports to bring this action on behalf
  • Defendants deny that this action should be maintained as a class action.
  • Defendants admit the allegations in the first sentence of paragraph 29,
  • and respectfully refer the Court to the merger agreement for its complete and accurate terms.
  • King's stock price closed between $41.3125 and $46.875.
  • Defendants admit the allegations in the first, second, and third sentences
  • Certificate of Incorporation of Medco Research,

  • 8 . SWIBS SECOND MOTION FOR PRELIM. INJUNCTION

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    MEDCO STOCKHOLDERS
    STOCK PRICE
    MERGER
    AVERAGE STOCK
    STOCKHOLDER MEETING
    COUNSEL
    KING
    DIRECTORS
    COURT
    SWIB
    RESCHEDULE
    MOTION
    SHAREHOLDER VOTE
    SHARES
    SCHEDULING
    CHANCERY
    WISCONSIN INVESTMENT
    ENJOINING
    RATIO
    DUTY
    TRADING
    WORTH
    HERETO
    SWIB RESPECTFULLY REQUESTS
    WILLIAMS
    MEDCO RESEARCH
    PLAINTIFF
    PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
    CLOSING STOCK PRICE
    
           IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
                           IN AND FOR NEW CASTLE COUNTY
    
    STATE OF WISCONSIN INVESTMENT
    BOARD, on behalf of itself and all others
    similarly situated,                                  i
                           Plaintiff,                    1
                    V.                                           Civil Action No.  17727-NC
                                                         i
    WILLIAM BARTLETT, JAY N. COHN,
    MARK B. HIRSCH, EUGENE L. STEP,
    RICHARD C. WILLIAMS, and MEDCO
    RESEARCH, INC.,
    
                           Defendants.
    
                                          NOTICE OF MOTION
                                          -
    TO:    Alan J. Stone, Esquire
           Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnel1
            120 1 Market Street
           Wilmington, DE 1980 1
    
                   PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that Plaintiff will present the attached Motion For
    
    Preliminary Injunction at the earliest convenience of the Court.
    
    
    
                                                         GRANT & EISENHOFER, P.A.
    
    
    Dated: February  17,200O
    
                                                         Jay W. Eisenhofer
                                                         Megan D. McIntrye
                                                         Cynthia A. Calder
                                                         John C. Kairis
                                                         Denise T. DiPersio
                                                         1220 N. Market Street, Suite 500
                                                         Wilmington, DE 1980 1
                                                         (302) 622-7000
    
                                                         Attorneys for Plaintiff State of Wisconsin
                                                         Investment Board
    
    
    
               IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
  • RICHARD C. WILLIAMS, and MEDCO
  • PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that Plaintiff will present the attached Motion For
  • Preliminary Injunction at the earliest convenience of the Court.
  • STATE OF WISCONSIN INVESTMENT BOARD'S
  • SECOND MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
  • undersigned counsel, hereby respectfully moves the Court, pursuant to Court of Chancery Rule
  • for an Order enjoining the February 25,200O Medco Research, Inc. shareholder vote on, and the
  • consummation of, a merger transaction between Medco Research, Inc. and King
  • with the Medco stockholders receiving King shares for their Medco
  • King's average closing stock price for the 20 day period ending 3 days prior to the
  • If the Average Stock Price falls between $49.87 and $33.00 per share,
  • the exchange ratio will be .68 18 shares of King for each share of Medco.
  • On February 2,2000, SWIB moved for a preliminary injunction enjoining the
  • then scheduled February lo,2000 Medco shareholder vote on, and the consummation of, the
  • Medco in an effort to reach an agreement as to the date on which to reschedule the Medco
  • refused to discuss the date on which the Medco Stockholder Meeting should be rescheduled and
  • Medco's directors breached their duty of care by not considering the economic
  • ramifications of scheduling the Medco Stockholders Meeting.
  • consider tax and dilutive effects of adoption of ESOP constituted breach of duty of care).
  • of February 16, 2000, King's closing stock price was $40 5116 a share, after trading at an
  • King shares that they would receive, albeit fewer of them, would be worth more
  • See Exhibit "A" attached hereto.
  • SWIB respectfully requests that this Court enter an Order:

  • 9 . ORDER

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    VOTE
    MERGER
    SUPPLEMENT
    MATERIALS
    PLAINTIFFS
    PROXY
    DEFENDANTS
    REASONS
    COURT
    MEDCO
    DELAWARE
    KING
    ADEQUATE
    ENJOIN
    REQUEST
    PLAINTIFF ASSERTS
    DISCLOSURES
    PROXY STATEMENT
    SOLICITATION
    RECOMMENDATION
    VOTING
    CONFIDENT
    ASSURE
    BENEFICIAL OWNERS
    FRANCHISE
    APPROVE
    ORIGINAL PROXY
    INSTRUCTIONS
    CAST
    
           IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
                           IN AND FOR NEW CASTLE COUNTY
    
    STATE OF WISCONSIN INVESTMENT )                                                      FILED
    BOARD, on behalf of itself and all others       )                        i                    \
    similarly situated,                             >                    .I,$  1  ii-  /  t.:.., ,  ,, 
                                                                                                       
                                                    >                              ,I
                  Plaintiff,                                            f~-+TiA!*r   in  CllanM&
                                                    >
                                                    >
    V.                                              ) C.A. No. 17727
    
    WILLIAM BARTLETT, JAY N. COHN,                  )
    MARK B. HIRSCH, EUGENE L. STEP,                 )
    RICHARD C. WILLIAMS and MEDCO                   )
    RESEARCH, INC.,                                 >>
                  Defendants.                       >
    
                                 Submitted: February  9,200O
                                 Decided: February  9,200O
    
                                         O R D E R
    
    Stuart M. Grant, Cynthia A. Calder,  Megan D. McIntyre, John C. Kairis and
    Denise T.  DiPersio of Grant  & Eisenhofer, Wilmington, Delaware. Attorneys for
    Plaintiff.
    
    A. Gilchrist Sparks, III, Alan J. Stone, S. Mark Hurd and Jessica Zeldin of Morris,
    Nichols, Arsht  & Tunnell, Wilmington, Delaware. OF COUNSEL: James R.
    Daly, Lee Ann Russo and Robert C. Micheletto of Jones, Day, Reavis  & Pogue,
    Chicago, Illinois. Attorneys for Defendants.
    
    
    STEELE, V.C.
    
    
    
          After reviewing the record, plaintiffs written and oral presentation in
    
    support of its application for a preliminary injunction seeking to enjoin a
    
    shareholder vote scheduled for 1000 hours February 10, 2000 on a merger which
    
    the shareholders have been requested to approve in that vote and defendant's
    
    opposition to plaintiffs application, the following findings and conclusions
    
    constitute the Order of the Court.
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
  • the shareholders have been requested to approve in that vote and defendant's
  • opposition to plaintiffs application,
  • Plaintiff asserts that supplemental disclosures issued by defendants on
  • 2000 represent an implied concession that an original proxy statement
  • recommended merger with King Pharmaceuticals, Inc. contained omissions,
  • supplemental proxy, new voting card and instructions, the total mix of information
  • shareholder to be confident of casting an informed vote for or against the merger.
  • concerns about adequate disclosure before the vote,
  • approval and recommendation process utilized by the Medco board or the
  • the supplemental proxy materials do directly and materially
  • reasonably affect their vote or motivate them to change a vote already cast.
  • scenario and serious consequences to shareholders in Medco and King reaches
  • help assure that the supplemental materials have wide
  • There are in short no reasons for the Court to timidly
  • at least an equally credible assumption that many beneficial owners have not as
  • That franchise can never be more important than
  • and recommending the merger in their request for shareholder action,
  • absorb and consider the supplement material and consummate a
  • for them to receive the supplemental proxy solicitation and its contents
  • in this Order nor its other arguments to enjoin the merger vote in its entirety.

  • 10 . MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS MOTION FOR EXPEDITED PROCEEDINGS

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    MERGER
    SHAREHOLDERS
    PLAINTIFF
    DIRECTORS
    VOTE
    MEDCO
    COURT
    LOCK-UP
    DELAWARE
    DEFENDANTS
    KING
    FACTS
    SWIB
    PROVISIONS
    MOTION
    DISCLOSURE
    TRANSACTION
    ILLEGAL LOCK-UP
    HARDSHIPS
    MEDCO STOCKHOLDERS
    WISCONSIN INVESTMENT
    AGREEMENT
    LUCKV STORE DEL
    PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
    EXPEDITED DISCOVERY
    DOCUMENT REQUESTS
    IRREPARABLE HARM
    SPECIAL MEETING
    STOCK OPTION
    
           IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
                           IN AND FOR NEW CASTLE COUNTY
    
    
    STATE OF WISCONSIN INVESTMENT
    BOARD, on behalf of itself and all others
    similarly situated,
                                                 i
                           Plaintiff,            >
                    V.                           I Civil Action No.1172 ? hc
    WILLIAM BARTLETT, JAY N. COHN,               j
    MARK B. HIRSCH, EUGENE L. STEP,                                                     -3
    RICHARD C. WILLIAMS, and MEDCO               1                             y:,y..,7,            c.
                                                                                                    CL2
    RESEARCH, INC.,                                                            1, c ;;-,
                                                 >                                                 .L.
                                                                               ~  -1               Z" -
                                                                                                   .a f
                                                                                                1. h , 
                           Defendants.           ;                                              I  -w".
                                                                         .,
                                                                                                  b
                                                                        `,_                   >a`
                                                                                   ,             *m
                                                                        L:.`;
                            MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN SUPPORT OF :;                                ;  c3  _
                                  9                                                             ";j
                                         OTION FOR -PROCEEDINGS
    
    
    
    
    Dated: January 10, 2000 Stuart M. Grant
                                                 Jay W. Eisenhofer
                                                 Cynthia A. Calder
                                                 John C. Kairis
                                                 GRANT & EISENHOFER, P.A.
                                                 1220 North Market Street, Suite 500
                                                 Wilmington, Delaware 19801
                                                 (302) 622-7000
                                                 Fax: (302) 622-7100
    
                                                 Attorneys for plaintiff, State of Wisconsin
                                                 Investment Board
    
    
    
    PRELIMINARY STATEMENT . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , , . . , . , .  
    
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
  • Plaintiff Is Likely to Succeed on Its Claims
  • Because the Directors Breached Their Fiduciary
  • Duties of Care and Loyalty in Connection with the Merger
  • Because Defendants' Breaches of Their Fiduciary
  • Duty of Disclosure Will Taint the Shareholders
  • Relief Because of the Inclusion of Illegal Lock-up
  • Provisions in the Merger Agreement
  • THE SWIB AND THE CLASS WILL BE IRREPARABLY HARMED IF THEY ARE NOT GRANTED EXPEDITED
  • PRELIMINARILY ENJOIN THE SHAREHOLDER VOTE
  • res Co. v. Luckv Store Del.
  • Citron v. Steego Corp. Del.
  • Plaintiff, the State of Wisconsin Investment Board, seeks to enjoin the merger of
  • Medco Research, Inc. and King Pharmaceuticals, Inc., based
  • proceedings and schedule a hearing on plaintiffs request for a preliminary injunction prior
  • February 10 Medco Special Meeting.
  • The facts are fully set forth in plaintiffs Verified Complaint and are incorporated herein by
  • On December 1, 1999, Medco announced that it had entered a merger transaction (the
  • King Pharmaceuticals, Inc. common stock based upon a 20 day average of the closing price
  • Medco stockholders would be paid with overly inflated currency.
  • expedited discovery are normally granted.
  • document requests and counsel cooperate in reasonable scheduling of depositions).
  • since the stock option prevents would be acquirers from using pooling-of-interest accounting
  • vote warrants a finding of irreparable harm.
  • Therefore, the balance of hardships

  • 11 . VERIFIED COMPLAINT

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    KING
    WILLIAMS
    STOCK
    MERGER
    PRICE
    DEFENDANTS
    TRANSACTION
    COMMON STOCK
    SHARES
    PLAINTIFF
    SHAREHOLDERS
    MEDCO STOCKHOLDERS
    FEE
    INVESTMENT
    PHARMACEUTICALS
    CLOSING
    WILLIAM BARTLETT
    MERGER CONSIDERATION
    DIRECTORS
    SWIB
    VALUATION
    WISCONSIN INVESTMENT
    COMPLAINT
    FIDUCIARY DUTY
    NEGOTIATING
    MATERIALS
    PROJECTIONS
    ALLEGATIONS RELATING
    PERSONAL KNOWLEDGE
    
               IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
                                IN AND FOR NEW CASTLE COUNTY
    
    STATE OF WISCONSIN INVESTMENT
    BOARD, on behalf of itself and all others
    similarly situated,
    
                           Plaintiff,
    
                    V.
    
    WILLIAM BARTLETT, JAY N. COHN,
    MARK B. HIRSCH, EUGENE L. STEP,
    RICHARD C. WILLIAMS, and MEDCO
    RESEARCH, INC.,
    
                           Defendants.
    
    
    
    
                    Plaintiff, the State of Wisconsin Investment Board  ("SWIB"), for its complaint
    
    against the defendants, makes the following allegations upon information and belief, except as to
    
    allegations relating to itself, which it makes upon personal knowledge.
    
                                                  OF THEACTION
    
                    1.     On December  1,1999,  Medco Research, Inc. ("Medco") announced that it had
    
    entered a merger transaction (the "Merger") in which each share of Medco common stock would be
    
    exchanged for .68 18 shares of King Pharmaceuticals, Inc. ("King") common stock based upon a 20
    
    day average of the closing price of King stock.
    
                    2.     If the closing of the Merger had taken place on the day it was announced
    
    (December 1,1999) Medco shareholders would have received $28.25 worth of King stock for each
    
    share of Medco stock. (See Exhibit A hereto for King's stock price for the 20 days prior to
    
    December 1, 1999). According to the Proxy Statement soliciting shareholder approval, the closing
    
    
    
    price of Medco stock that same day was $27.25. Thus, the deal on the day it was approved would
    
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • RICHARD C. WILLIAMS, and MEDCO
  • Plaintiff, the State of Wisconsin Investment Board, for its complaint
  • against the defendants, makes the following allegations upon information and belief, except
  • allegations relating to itself, which it makes upon personal knowledge.
  • entered a merger transaction in which each share of Medco common stock would be
  • exchanged for .68 18 shares of King Pharmaceuticals, Inc. common stock based upon a 20
  • day average of the closing price of King stock.
  • If the closing of the Merger had taken place on the day it was announced
  • have provided Medco shareholders with a mere 3.67% premium for their shares.
  • Conversely, if the price of King stock ran up, Medco stockholders
  • their new King holdings at anything near the claimed value of the Merger consideration.
  • by the Medco board of directors.
  • The Medco board then breached its fiduciary duty to its shareholders by
  • a transaction closed, and nothing if a transaction did not close.
  • the one person negotiating on
  • judgment and walked away from a bad deal, Williams' fee disappeared.
  • SWIB is, and has been at all relevant times, the holder of 1,206,400 shares of Medco
  • Defendants William Bartlett, Jay N. Cohn, Mark B. Hirsch, and Eugene L.
  • to assist it in this endeavor and to disseminate materials about Medco to potential partners.
  • though no valuation of Medco had been performed.
  • results and projections and the possible synergies of a King-Medco combination.
  •    |