LegalCaseDocs.com
shopping cart  
  |     
Search
 

 
New Visitors


 VeriSign Secure Site

 Get Adobe Reader

CHESAPEAKE CORP. v SHORE Click to find out why . . .



Keywords & Phrases
CaseNo: C.A. No. 17,626, CourtCode: CC, CourtName: IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE, Plaintiff: CHESAPEAKE CORP., State: DE Delaware, UniqueCaseRef: DE>CC>00017626, Shorewood, Chesapeake, Shore, Bylaw, Stockholders, Kamsky, Stock, Amended Super-majority Bylaw, Directors, Fairley, Marc Shore, Allegations, Delaware, Ariel, Liebman, Tender, Consent Solicitation, Del, Common Stock, Super-majority Bylaw, Shares, Acquisition, Counterclaims, Understanding, Bannon, Bylaw Amendments, Shorewood Packaging, Verebay, Shareholders, Agreement, Provisions, Shorewood Board, Outstanding Stock, Response, Complaint, Dep, Stockholder, Supermajority Bylaw, Ariel Agreement , ContentID: 120239693

Case Documents
1 2000-02-14 FINAL ORDER AND JUDGMENT PURSUANT TO COURT OF CHANCERY RULE 54(B
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 100222
2 pages
PDF
2 2000-02-07 MEMORANDUM OPINION
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 100223
127 pages
PDF
3 2000-01-21 OPENING POST-TRIAL BRIEF OF CHESAPEAKE AND SHEFFIELD
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 102633
87 pages
PDF
4 2000-01-21 DEFENDANTS OPENING POST-TRIAL BRIEF
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 102632
77 pages
PDF
5 2000-01-10 PRE-TRIAL BRIEF OF CHESAPEAKE CORP. AND SHEFFIELD INC. WITH RESPECT TO BYLAW CLAIMS
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 102634
47 pages
PDF
6 2000-01-06 DEFENDANTS PRE-TRIAL BRIEF
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 102635
65 pages
PDF
7 2000-01-05 REPLY TO COUNTERCLAIMS
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 101557
10 pages
PDF
8 1999-12-16 ANSWER AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES AND COUNTERCLAIMS OF DEFENDANTS
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 101558
25 pages
PDF
9 1999-12-08 LETTER TO V.C. STRINE
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 102636
7 pages
PDF
10 1999-12-03 COMPLAINT
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 101559
25 pages
PDF
Total Documents: 10 documents , 472 pages
Price: $ 64.95


IVESLCD01 KGI0001
 
 

 Forgot your password?


1 . FINAL ORDER AND JUDGMENT PURSUANT TO COURT OF CHANCERY RULE 54(B)

EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
SUPERMAJORITY BYLAW
COURT
RELATING
DEFENDANTS
SHOREWOOD
DIRECTORS
REMOVAL COUNTERCLAIM
OPINION
RELIEF SET
CHANCERY
CHESAPEAKE
OFTHE
LAW
HEREBY
OFFKERS
EMPLOYEES
AGENTS
ACTING
CONCERT
RELYING
ENFORCING
SUPER-MAJORITY BYLAW
MERITS
PREJUDICE
ACCORDANCE
ALLOCATION
COSTS
EXPENSES
ATTORNEYS FEES
              IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE

                             IN AND FOR NEW CASTLE COUNTY

 CHESAPEAKE CORPORATION and
 SHEFFIELD, INC.

                        Plaintiffs,            i           C.A. No. 17626
        V.                                     ;
                                               >
 MARC P SHORE, HOWARD M.
 LIEBMAN, ANDREW N. SHORE,                     ;
 LEONARD  J. VEREBAY, VIRGINIA A. )
 KAMSKY, SHARON R. FAIRLEY, R.                 )
 TIMOTHY O'DONNELL, KEVIN J.
 BANNON, WILLIAM P. WEIDNER,                   1
 and SHOREWOOD PACKAGING                       >
 CORPORATION,
                                                i
                        Defendants.             )

                               FINAL ORDER AND JUDGMENT
                   PURSUANT TO COURT OF CHANCERY RULE 54(b)

       WHEREAS in this action the plaintiffs asserted, inter alia, claims relating to Article X 

Amended and Restated By-laws of defendant Shorewood Packaging Corporation, as amended

(respectively, the "Supermajority Bylaw Claims," the "Supermajority Bylaw" and "Shorewood");

       WHEREAS in this action the defendants asserted counterclaims relating to (i) Section 203

of the General Corporation Law (the "Section 203 Counterclaim") and (ii) the ability of the

of Shorewood to be removed without cause (the "Removal Counterclaim");

       WHEREAS with the approval  ofthe Court, the parties tried the Supermajority Bylaw Claims,

the Section 203 Counterclaim and the Removal Counterclaim on the grounds that resolution  ofthose

claims was necessary before Chesapeake could proceed with its consent solicitation (the "Tried

Claims"), and



          WHEREAS the Court issued an opinion dated February 7, 2000 (the "Opinion") resolving

the Tried Claims and making findings of fact and reaching conclusions of law relating thereto,
SNIPPETS:
  • IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
  • WHEREAS in this action the plaintiffs asserted, inter alia, claims relating to Article X ofthe
  • Amended and Restated By-laws of defendant Shorewood Packaging Corporation,
  • (respectively, the "Supermajority Bylaw Claims," the "Supermajority Bylaw" and "Shorewood");
  • WHEREAS in this action the defendants asserted counterclaims relating to Section 203
  • of the General Corporation Law and the ability of the directors
  • of Shorewood to be removed without cause (the "Removal Counterclaim");
  • WHEREAS with the approval ofthe Court, the parties tried the Supermajority Bylaw Claims,
  • the Section 203 Counterclaim and the Removal Counterclaim on the grounds that resolution
  • claims was necessary before Chesapeake could proceed with its consent solicitation (the "Tried
  • WHEREAS the Court issued an opinion dated February 7,
  • IT IS HEREBY DECLARED AND ORDERED, this - day of February, 2000, for the
  • Shorewood, its directors, offkers, employees, agents and anyone
  • acting in concert with them are enjoined from relying on, implementing, applying or enforcing
  • Super-majority Bylaw, whether as originally adopted, as subsequently adopted and/or ratified
  • dismissed on their merits with prejudice.
  • Claims and the relief set forth herein is directed in accordance with this Order.
  • and issues raised by this action other than the Tried Claims, including but not limited to
  • of costs and expenses and any application for attorneys fees.

  • 2 . MEMORANDUM OPINION

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    DEFENDANTS
    SHOREWOOD
    CHESAPEAKE
    COURT
    KAMSKY
    BYLAW
    STOCKHOLDERS
    ESQUIRE
    VICE CHANCELLOR
    DIRECTORS
    MEETING
    OPINION
    CONSENT SOLICITATION
    ARIEL
    DELAWARE
    MARC SHORE
    SUPERMAJORITY BYLAW
    SHAREHOLDERS
    ARIEL AGREEMENT
    MANAGEMENT
    TRANSACTION
    INVESTMENT
    ACQUISITION
    INADEQUATE
    REASONABLENESS
    PROXY FIGHT
    EFFECTIVENESS
    LITIGATION
    COMMUNICATION
    
             IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
    
                           IN AND FOR NEW CASTLE COUNTY
    
    
    CHEASAPEAKE CORPORATION and
    SHEFFIELD, INC.,
                                                           >
                        Plaintiffs,                        >
    
            V.                                                    Civil Action No. 17626
    
    MARC P. SHORE, HOWARD M. LIEBMAN                       i
    ANDREW N. SHORE, LEONARD J. VERABAY, )
    VIRGINIA A. KAMSKY, SHARON R. FAIRLEY, )
    R. TIMOTHY O'DONNELL, KEVIN J. BANNON )
    WlLLIAM  P. WEIDNER, and SHOREWOOD                     )
    PACKAGING CORPORATION,
                                                           ;
                        Defendants.                        >
    
                                 MEMORANDUM OPINION
    
                               Date Submitted: January 28,200O
                                Date Decided: February 7,200O
    
    Jesse A. Finkelstein, Esquire, C. Malcolm Cochran, IV, Esquire, Anne C. Foster,
    Esquire, Lisa A. Schmidt, Esquire, J. Travis Laster, Esquire, Srinivas M. Raju, Esq-uire,
    Michael D. Allen, Esquire, of RICHARDS, LAYTON  & FINGER, Wilmington,
    Delaware; OF COUNSEL: James E. Far&am, Esquire, Edward J. Fuhr, Esquire, Stacy
    ~Colvin Taylor, Esquire, of HUNTON & WILLIAMS, Richmond, Virginia, Attorneys
    for Plaintiffs.
    
    
    Edward P. Welch, Esquire, Robert S. Saunders, Esquire,  Martina Bernstein, Esquire,
    Julie A. To&up, Esquire, of Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom, Wilmington,
    Delaware, Attorneys for Defendants.
    
    
    STRINE, Vice Chancellor
    
    
    
           This case involves a contest for control between two corporations in
    
    the specialty packaging industry, the plaintiff Chesapeake Corporation and
    
    the defendant Shorewood Packaging Corporation, whose boards of directors
    
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
  • Edward P. Welch, Esquire, Robert S. Saunders, Esquire, Martina Bernstein, Esquire, Julie A.
  • Shorewood started the dance by making a 41%, all-cash, all-shares
  • premium offer for Chesapeake.
  • inadequate, citing the fact that the stock market was undervaluing its shares.
  • tender offer or proxy fight, the Shorewood board adopted a host of defensive
  • eliminated the ability of stockholders to call special meetings and gave the
  • Shorewood board control over the record date for any consent solicitation.
  • Because Shorewood's management controls nearly 24% of the company's
  • challenging the 66 2/3% Supermajority Bylaw.
  • board, which is dominated by inside directors, adopted the Bylaw so as to
  • In this post-trial opinion, I conclude that the defendants have not met
  • Inc. is Chesapeake's wholly-owned acquisition vehicle for its hoped-for
  • Defendant Marc P. Shore is Shorewood's Chairman and Chief
  • Marc Shore receives generous compensation from Shorewood.
  • about the need for and the basis of this transaction was,
  • Defendant Virginia A. Kamsky is the founder, CEO, and principal
  • investment in a manufacturing facility in China.
  • As Vice Chancellor Jacobs well put it: By blocking discovery into these subjects, the
  • It must be emphasized that under Unocal and Unilrin the defendants have the burden of showing
  • Shorewood board meeting, Shore obtained the board's support for this plan.
  • Shorewood to take its offer to the Chesapeake shareholders.
  • their position in this litigation,
  • communication efforts, and the fact that reputable analysts were already
  • An obvious target in the Chesapeake/Shorewood struggle was Ariel
  • dispute Chesapeake's version of what the Ariel Agreement says,

  • 3 . OPENING POST-TRIAL BRIEF OF CHESAPEAKE AND SHEFFIELD

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    SHOREWOOD
    KAMSKY
    CHESAPEAKE
    FAIRLEY
    LIEBMAN
    VEREBAY
    BANNON
    DIRECTORS
    DEL
    BYLAW
    MARC SHORE
    DEFENDANT
    STOCKHOLDER
    DELAWARE
    MEETING
    BYLAW AMENDMENTS
    PROCEEDING
    SUPERMAJORITY BYLAW
    CONSENT SOLICITATION
    SHOREWOOD PACKAGING
    SHAREHOLDERS
    ACQUISITION
    MANAGEMENT
    JCG
    AUTHORITIES
    WRITTEN MATERIALS
    STOCKHOLDER FRANCHISE
    INVESTMENT
    PRIMARY PURPOSE
    
                       IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
    
                                  IN AND FOR NEW CASTLE COUNTY
    
    CHESAPEAKE CORPORATION and
    SHEFFIELD, INC.,
                                                 ;           PUBLIC VERSION
                              Plaintiffs,
                                                 i            Civil Action No. 17626NC
               V.
                                                 ;
    MARC P. SHORE, HOWARD M.                     >
    LIEBMAN, ANDREW N. SHORE,                    1
    LEONARD J. VEREBAY, VIRGINIA A.
    KAMSKY, SHARON R. FAIRLEY, R.
    TIMOTHY O'DONNELL, KEVIN J.
    BANNON, WILLIAM P. WEIDNER, and
     SHOREWOOD PACKAGING
     CORPORATION,
    
                              Defendants.
    
    
    
                                    OPENING  POST-TRIAL BRIEF OF
                         CHESAPEAKE CORPORATION AND SHEFFIELD, INC.
    
    
    
                                                      Jesse A. Finkelstein
                                                      C. Malcolm Co&ran, IV
                                                      Anne C. Foster
                                                      Lisa A. Schmidt
     OF COUNSEL:                                      J. Travis Laster
                                                      Michael D. Allen
     James E. Farnham                                 Michael 3. Merchant
     Edward J. Fuhr                                   Richards, Layton & Finger
     Stacy Calvin Taylor                              One Rodney Square
     Hunton & Williams                                P. 0. Box 551
     Riverfront Plaza                                 Wilmington, DE 19899
     95 1 East Byrd Street                            (302) 658-6541
     Richmond, VA 23219-4074                           Attorneys for Plaintiffs
    
    
    Dated: January 21,200O
    
    RLI'I-2109107-1
    
    
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
  • SHOREWOOD PACKAGING CORPORATION,
  • CHESAPEAKE CORPORATION AND SHEFFIELD, INC.
  • Howard M. Liebman
  • Andrew N. Shore
  • Leonard J. Verebay
  • Virginia A. Kamsky
  • Kevin J. Bannon
  • Sharon R. Fairley
  • Chesapeake Identifies Shorewood As An Acquisition Candidate.
  • F. The Shorewood Board Adopts The Bylaw Amendments.
  • -ill-TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
  • Del.
  • In re Budget Rent-A-Car Corn Shareholders Litin.,

  • 4 . DEFENDANTS OPENING POST-TRIAL BRIEF

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    CHESAPEAKE
    STOCK
    UNDERSTANDING
    ARIEL
    AGREEMENT
    FAIRLEY
    KAMSKY
    JOHNSON
    SHOREWOOD BOARD
    STOCKHOLDERS
    SUPPORT
    OUTSTANDING STOCK
    INCENTIVES
    SHARES
    OWNER
    ACQUISITION
    ARRANGEMENT
    SHEFFIELD
    COUNTERCLAIMS
    CHESAPEAKE BID
    SHOREWOOD PACKAGING
    RENDERS CHESAPEAKE
    SUPER-MAJORITY BYLAW
    PROPOSED ACQUISITION
    PLAINTIFFS
    REMOVAL PROPOSALS
    MORTON DEP
    CHESAPEAKE ADMITS
    DIRECTORS
    
                                              PUBLIC  VF.RS:LON  -  JANUARY 26, 2000
    
    
    
                                                                                       IS+
    
    
    
            IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
    
                          IN AND FOR NEW CASTLE COUNTY
    
    CHESAPEAKE CORPORATION and           :
    SHEFFIELD, INC.,
    
                Plaintiffs/
                Counterclaim-Defendants, :
    
          V. Civil Action No. 17626NC
    
    MARC P. SHORE, HOWARD M. :
    LIEBMAN, ANDREW N. SHORE, :
    LEONARD J. VEREBAY, VIRGINIA A. :
    KAMSKY, SHARON R. FAIRLEY,
    R. TlMOTHY O'DONNELL, KEVIN J. :
    BANNON, WILLIAM P. WEIDNER,
    and SHOREWOOD PACKAGING :
    CORPORATION,
    
                Defendants/
                Counterclaimants.
                                                                          i !        /*-
                    DEFENDANTS' OPENING POST-TRIAL BRIEF                  L:         .::
                                                                                 -`. ci
                                         SKADDEN, ARPS, SLATE,
                                              MEAGHER & FLOM LLP
                                         One Rodney Square
                                         Post Office Box 636
                                         Wilmington, Delaware 19899-0636
                                         (302) 6.5 l-3000
                                         Attorneys for DefendantslCounterclaimants
    
    DATED: January 2 1,200O
    
    
    
                                               TABLE OF COh'TENTS
    
                                                                                                       
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • SHEFFIELD, INC.,
  • and SHOREWOOD PACKAGING:
  • Than 15% Of The Outstanding Stock Of Shorewood
  • Understanding That Renders Chesapeake An Owner Of More Than
  • (cl Chesapeake admits that the Incentives affect Ariel's
  • agreement, arrangement, or understanding under Section
  • 203 with respect to all 20% of Shorewood shares.
  • The Removal Proposals Are Inconsistent With Section 141.
  • THE SHOREWOOD DIRECTORS DID NOT BREACH
  • THEIR FIDUCIARY DUTIES BY ADOPTING THE SUPER-MAJORITY BYLAW.
  • The Shorewood Board reasonably perceived the

  • 5 . PRE-TRIAL BRIEF OF CHESAPEAKE CORP. AND SHEFFIELD INC. WITH RESPECT TO BYLAW CLAIMS

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    BYLAW
    STOCKHOLDERS
    MARC SHORE
    CHESAPEAKE
    SUPER-MAJORITY BYLAW
    DEP
    LIEBMAN
    DEL
    DELAWARE
    COURT
    MEETING
    BOARD MEMBERS
    DIRECTORS
    KAMSKY
    BANNON
    BYLAW AMENDMENTS
    CONSENT SOLICITATION
    ORIGINAL SUPER-MAJORITY BYLAW
    INDIVIDUAL DEFENDANTS
    PLAINTIFFS
    SHAREHOLDERS
    STOCKHOLDER FRANCHISE
    EFFECTIVENESS
    REASONABLENESS
    COMPENSATION
    PROXY CONTEST
    JUSTIFICATION
    ENTRENCHING
    DELAWARE LAW
    
                      IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
    
                                  IN AND FOR NEW CASTLE COUNTY
    
    CHESAPEAKE CORPORATION and
    SHEFFIELD, INC.,
                                                             PUBLIC VERSION
                              Plaintiffs,
                                                              Civil Action No. 17626NC
              V.
    
    MARC P. SHORE, HOWARD M.
    LIEBMAN, ANDREW N. SHORE,
    LEONARD  J. VEREBAY, VIRGINIA A.
    KAMSKY, SHARON R. FAIRLEY, R.
     TIMOTHY O'DONNELL, KEVIN  J.
     BANNON, WILLIAM P. WEIDNER, and
     SHOREWOOD PACKAGING
     CORPORATION,                                                                                      
                                                                                                    
                                                                                                  _..  
                                                                                                  .., 
                              Defendants.                                                        I  "_ 
                                                                                                 :     
                                                                                           r`          
                                                                                           .h  _'      
                                                                                      :                
                                                                                     -i
                                                                                    .                 
    
                                                                                                       
                                                                                 :'  1,.  ;            
    
                      PRE-TRIAL  B R I E F   O F   C H E S A P E A K E   CORPORATION AND *  `.
                      SHEFFIELD, INC. WITH RESPECT TO THE BYLAW CLAIMS c;  1
    
    
    
    
                                                        R. Franklin Balotti
    OF COUNSEL:                                         Jesse A. Finkelstein
                                                        Anne C. Foster
    James E. Farnham                                    Richards, Layton & Finger
    Edward J. Fuhr                                       One Rodney Square
    Stacy Colvin Taylor                                 P. 0. Box 551
    Hunton  & Williams                                   Wilmington, DE 19899
    Riverfront Plaza                                     (302) 658-6541
    95 1 East Byrd Street                                 Attorneys for
    Richmond, VA 232 19-4074                              Chesapeake Corporation
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
  • CHESAPEAKE CORPORATION and
  • Plaintiffs,
  • Interested In Entrenching Themselves
  • Maintain Himself At The Helm Of Shorewood
  • A Majority Of The Board Is Beholden To Marc Shore
  • Shorewood Stockholders.
  • THE SUPER-MAJORITY BYLAW INFRINGES ON THE STOCKHOLDER FRANCHISE WITHOUT A COMPELLING
  • Aronson v. Lewis, Del.

  • 6 . DEFENDANTS PRE-TRIAL BRIEF

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    AMENDED SUPER-MAJORITY BYLAW
    CHESAPEAKE
    DIRECTORS
    COURT
    STOCKHOLDERS
    ARIEL
    PROVISIONS
    DELAWARE
    STOCK
    VOTE
    SHARES
    DGCL
    DEL
    ARIEL AGREEMENT
    TENDER
    SHAREHOLDERS
    ACQUISITION
    SHOREWOOD PACKAGING
    CONSISTENT
    OUTSTANDING STOCK
    REASONABLENESS
    COUNTERCLAIMS
    PLAINTIFFS
    BYLAW AMENDMENTS
    TRANSACTION
    CONSENT SOLICITATION
    VOTE REQUIREMENT
    USACAFES
    INADEQUATE
    
                                                                       PUBLIC VERSION
    
    
                IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
    
                              IN AND FOR NEW CASTLE COUNTY
    
    CHESAPEAKE CORPORATION and
    SHEFFIELD, INC.,
    
                   Plaintiffs/
                   Counterclaim-Defendants,
    
          V.
    
    MARC P. SHORE, HOWARD M.
    LIEBMAN, ANDREW N. SHORE,
    LEONARD J. VEREBAY, VIRGINIA A.
    KAMSKY, SHARON R. FAIRLEY,
    R. TIMOTHY O'DONNELL, KEVIN J.
    BANNON, WILLIAM P. WEIDNER,
    and SHOREWOOD PACKAGING
    CORPORATION,
    
                   Defendants/
                   Counterclaimants.
    
    
                                  DEFENDANTS' PRE-TRIAL BRIEF
    
                                               SKADDEN, ARPS, SLATE,
                                                  MEAGHER & FLOM LLP
                                               One Rodney Square
                                               Post Office Box 636
                                               Wilmington, Delaware 19899-0636
                                               (302) 65 I-3000
                                               Attorneys for  Defendants/Counterclaimants
    
    DATED: January  6,200O
    
    
    
                                               TABLE OF CONTENTS
    
    
    T A B L E   O F   C A S E S   A N D   A U T H O R I T I E S                                        
    
    P R E L I M I N A R Y   S T A T E M E N T                                                          
    
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
  • more general provisions of Section 109 20
  • The Amended Super-Majoriu Bylaw Is Consistent With Case Law.
  • THE SHOREWOOD DIRECTORS DID NOT BREACH THEIR FIDUCIARY DUTIES BY ADOPTING THE AMENDED
  • THE PROPOSED ACQUISITION WOULD VIOLATE SECTION 203 BECAUSE PLAINTIFFS HAVE EACH BECOME AN
  • The Ariel Agreement gives Chesapeake the "right to vote"
  • W Section Six does not supersede or contradict Sec-Of The Stock Of Shorewood.
  • Inc., Del.
  • T&s action arises out of a hostile tender offer by Plaintiff Chesapeake
  • Corporation for the stock of Defendant Shorewood Packaging
  • Section 203 of the Delaware General Corporation Law (the "DGCL") was enacted to
  • Chesapeake also challenges a super-majority vote bylaw adopted by
  • acquiring all the outstanding shares of Shorewood.
  • approximately 4.62% of Chesapeake's outstanding stock,
  • negotiated transaction to achieve this result.
  • stockholders, Chesapeake refused to consider or discuss any negotiations with Shorewood
  • Shorewood Rejects Initial Offer as Inadequate and AdoDts Bvlaw Amendments
  • [Tjhe primary reason that was perceived by the board was that if there were going to be a
  • ?he Shorewood Board adopted a number of additional bylaw amendments as of November 22, 1999
  • then Ariel agrees to use its best efforts & investment adviser to exercise its discretionary
  • The Shorewood Board Announces that it Will Not Recommend the Tender Offer and Files
  • by directors and imposing a super-majority vote requirement to amend a bylaw - been&, there
  • Likewise, in USACafes, then-Vice Chancellor IBerger presumed the

  • 7 . REPLY TO COUNTERCLAIMS

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    ALLEGATIONS
    PARAGRAPH
    CHESAPEAKE
    RESPONSE
    REFERENCE
    SHEFFIELD
    THEREOF
    SHOREWOOD PACKAGING
    LAW
    ARIEL
    FIRST SENTENCE
    SECOND SENTENCE
    RESPONSIVE PLEADING
    CERTIFICATE
    SHEFFIELD LACK KNOWLEDGE
    STOCK PURCHASE
    INFORMATION SUFFICIENT
    TRUTH
    PRELIMINARY CONSENT STATEMENT
    AGREEMENT
    DELAWARE
    INCORPORATION
    AMENDMENT
    GENERAL CORPORATION LAW
    LANGUAGE THEREOF
    THIRD SENTENCE
    SENTENCES OFPARAGRAPH
    SCHEDULE
    PARTY
    
                      IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE                                
                                                                                                       F
                                                                                                      
                                  IN AND FOR NEW CASTLE COUNTY
    
     CHESAPEAKE CORPORATION and
     SHEFFIELD, INC.,
    
                             Plaintiffs,
                                                                  C.A. No. 17626
              V.
    
     MARC P. SHORE, HOWARD M.
     LlEBMAN, ANDREW N. SHORE,
     LEONARD  J. VEREBAY, VIRGINIA A.
     KAMSKY, SHARON R. FAIRLEY,
     R TIMOTHY O'DONNELL, KEVIN J.
     BANNON, WILLIAM P. WEIDNER, and
     SHOREWOOD PACKAGING
     CORPORATION,
    
                             Defendants,
    
                                      REPLY TO COUNTERCLAIMS
    
             Chesapeake Corporation ("Chesapeake") and Sheffield, Inc. ("Sheffield"),  bytheir
    
    reply to the Counterclaims of Shorewood Packaging Corp. (the "Counterclaims"), as follows:
    
             97. In response to Paragraph 97, Chesapeake and Sheffield incorporate by reference the
    
    allegations of the Complaint.
    
             98. Chesapeake and Sheffield lack knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief
    
    as to the truth of the allegations of the first sentence of Paragraph 98 of the Counterclaims,
    
    that it is admitted that Ariel Capital Management, Inc. ("Ariel")  is not a party to this action
    
    a registered investment advisor. The allegations of the second sentence of Paragraph 98 of the
    
    Counterclaims are denied, except that it is admitted that Chesapeake and  Sheftield  filed a
    
    Preliminary Consent Statement with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "SEC") on
    
    December 3, 1999, reference to which is made for the terms and contents thereof.
    
    
    RLFI-2099894-l
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • SHOREWOOD PACKAGING CORPORATION,
  • Chesapeake Corporation and Sheffield, Inc., bytheir attorneys,
  • In response to Paragraph 97, Chesapeake and Sheffield incorporate by reference the
  • Chesapeake and Sheffield lack knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief
  • as to the truth of the allegations of the first sentence of Paragraph 98 of the Counterclaims,
  • that it is admitted that Ariel Capital Management, Inc. is not a party to this action and is
  • The allegations of the second sentence of Paragraph 98 of the
  • December 3, 1999, reference to which is made for the terms and contents thereof.
  • admitted that Ariel filed an Amendment No. 15 to Schedule 13G with the SEC on July 8, 1999,
  • The allegations of the first sentence of Paragraph 101 of the Counterclaims are
  • Stock Purchase Agreement, reference to which is made for the terms and contents thereof.
  • as to which no responsive pleading is required.
  • belief as to the truth of any allegations about the knowledge of any representative of Ariel.
  • allegations of the third sentence of Paragraph 107 of the Counterclaims are denied.
  • December 3, 1999, Chesapeake and Sheffield filed a Preliminary Consent Statement with the SEC
  • conclusions of law as to which no responsive pleading is required.
  • the allegations ofthe first two sentences ofparagraph 113 ofthe Counterclaims are denied.
  • admitted that the General Corporation Law of the State of Delaware contains a Section 203,
  • reference to which is made for the language thereof.
  • denied, except that it is admitted that a Certificate of Incorporation of Shorewood
  • The Counterclaims should be dismissed for failure to,join an indispensable party.

  • 8 . ANSWER AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES AND COUNTERCLAIMS OF DEFENDANTS

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    PLAINTIFFS
    SHOREWOOD
    STOCK
    DEFENDANTS
    TENDER
    COMPLAINT
    PARAGRAPHS
    COMMON STOCK
    RESPONSE
    SHARES
    SHORE
    ARIEL
    STOCK PURCHASE AGREEMENT
    THEREOF
    DELAWARE
    PROPOSALS
    SHOREWOOD BOARD
    STOCKHOLDER
    INCOMPLETE
    MISLEADING CHARACTERIZATION
    OUTSTANDING SHARES
    DIRECTORS
    AFFILIATES
    CHESAPEAKE
    COUNTERCLAIMS
    ACCORDANCE
    ACQUISITION
    PROPOSED ACQUISITION
    FULLY SET
    
             IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
    
                                   IN AND FOR NEW CASTLE COUNTY
    
    ____--_--_-__---_---------------- X
    CHESAPEAKE CORPORATION and                                      >
    SHEFFIELD, INC.,                                                >>
                                  Plaintiffs,                       >>                                 
                                                                                                       
              V.                                                                                       
                                                                    >                             .I
                                                                    >      No. 17626 NC           :,  1
    MARC P. SHORE, HOWARD M.                                        >
    LIEBMAN, ANDREW N. SHORE,                                       >                             _`.
    LEONARD J. VEREBAY, VIRGINIA A.                                 )                                  
    KAMSKY, SHARON R. FAIRLEY,                                      >                      -5.
    R. TIMOTHY O'DONNELL, KEVIN J.                                  >
    BANNON, WILLIAM P. WEIDNER                                      >
    and SHOREWOOD PACKAGING                                         >
    CORPORATION,                                                    >>
                                  Defendants.                       >
    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - X
    
                                   ANSWER, AFFIRMATIVE  DEFENSES
                              AND COUNTERCLAIMS OF DEFENDANTS
    
                        Defendants Marc P. Shore, Howard M. Liebman, Andrew N. Shore,
    
    Leonard J. Verebay, Virginia A. Kamsky, Sharon R. Fairley, R. Timothy 0' Donnell,
    
    Kevin J. Bannon,  William P. Weidner (collectively, the "Director Defendants") and
    
    Shorewood Packaging Corporation ("Shorewood" or the "Company," together with the
    
    Director Defendants, the "Defendants"), by their undersigned counsel, answer Plaintiffs'
    
    Complaint ("Complaint") in accordance with the numbered paragraphs thereof as follows:
    
    
    
                                    NATURE OF THE ACTION
    
                    1.       Admitted in part and denied in part. Admitted that on December 3,
    
    1999, Plaintiffs commenced a tender offer for Shorewood's common stock at 9; 17.25 per
    
    share (the "Tender Offer"). The remaining allegations are denied.
    
                   2.        Admitted in part and denied in part. Admitted that Plaintiffs
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • AND COUNTERCLAIMS OF DEFENDANTS
  • Defendants Marc P. Shore, Howard M. Liebman, Andrew N. Shore,
  • Shorewood Packaging Corporation ("Shorewood" or the "Company," together with the
  • Director Defendants, the "Defendants"), by their undersigned counsel, answer Plaintiffs'
  • Complaint in accordance with the numbered paragraphs thereof as follows:
  • Plaintiffs commenced a tender offer for Shorewood's common stock at 9;
  • share (the "Tender Offer").
  • The remaining allegations are denied.
  • Chesapeake proposes to nominate for election to the Shorewood Board of Directors are
  • Chesapeake Proposal, the Director Defendants amended the Shorewood Bylaws
  • Article X speaks for itself and Plaintiffs' incomplete and misleading
  • shares of Shorewood's common stock beneficially owned by Chesapeake is 14.9%.
  • Purchaser is a corporation incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware.
  • By way of further response, Defendants state that on December 16, 1999,
  • Mr. Shore called Mr. Johnson and proposed an acquisition of Chesapeake by Shorewood;
  • and Plaintiffs' incomplete and misleading characterization thereof is denied.
  • Paragraph 35 of the Complaint are admitted.
  • through 5 1 of the Complaint as if fully set forth herein.
  • COUNTERCLAIMS FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
  • THE STOCK PURCHASE AGREEMENT WITH ARIEL MAKES PLAINTIFFS AN "INTERESTED STOCKHOLDER" UNDER
  • position amounts to 20.28% of the outstanding shares of Shorewood common stock.
  • affiliates have become both an "interested stockholder" and "associate" of Shorewood
  • Section 203 inapplicable to the Proposed Acquisition would be ultra vires.
  • Proposal No. 1 and Proposal No. 2 will be referred to hereinafter as the "Removal Proposals."

  • 9 . LETTER TO V.C. STRINE

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    PLAINTIFFS
    CONSENT
    DIRECTORS
    STOCKHOLDERS
    COURT
    SHOREWOOD
    PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
    CONSENT SOLICITATION
    SLIP
    DEL
    REVIEW
    DEFENDANTS
    POWER
    MERITS
    STRINE
    AUTHORITY
    USACAFES
    HONORABLE LEO
    CHANCELLOR
    REASONS
    BYLAW AMENDMENTS
    COMPLAINT
    WRITTEN CONSENT
    TENDER
    IMPROPER
    DGCL
    EDELMAN SLIP
    VALIDITY
    INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
    
                                         S K A D D E N ,   A R P S ,   S L A T E ,   M E A G H E R   & 
                                                                    O N E   R O D N E Y   SQUARE       
                                                                                                       
                                                                                                       
                                                                           P.O.  B O X   6 3 6         
                                                                                                       
                                                          W I L M I N G T O N ,   D E L A W A R E  
                                                                                                       
                                                                                                       
                                                                       T E L :   (302)  6.51-3000      
                                                                                                       
                                                                       F A X :   (302)  651-3  0   0  
                                                                                                       
                                                                                                       
                                                                                                       
           DlREc-r   DlAL                                                                              
    I3021   6 5   I - 3 0 6 0                                                                          
                                                                                                       
           DlREcr  FAX                                                                                 
    (302)   6 5   I - 3 0 0   I                                                                        
           EMAL   AODRESS                                                                              
    LWELCH@SKADDEN.COM                                                                                 
                                                                                                       
                                                                                                       
                                                                                                       
                                                                        December 8, 1999
    
    
    
    
                VIA HAND DELIVERY
                The Honorable Leo E. Strine, Jr.
                Vice Chancellor
                Court of Chancery
                Daniel L. Herrmann Courthouse
                 1020 North King Street
                Wilmington, Delaware 1980 1
    
                                          Re:      Chesapeake Corporation, et al. v. Shore, et al.,
                                                   Civil Action No. 17626
    
                Dear Vice Chancellor Strine:
    
                                          We represent Shorewood Packaging Corporation ("Shorewood")
                Directors (collectively, the "Defendants") in the above-captioned case. On December 6,
                we received courtesy copies of a Motion for Expedited Proceedings in anticipation of
                as-yet-unfiled motion for preliminary injunction. For the reasons set forth below, we
                believe that under the circumstances presented in this case it would appropriate for
                set a date for a preliminary injunction hearing, or grant expedited discovery. The
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • The Honorable Leo E. Strine,
  • Vice Chancellor Court of Chancery
  • Dear Vice Chancellor Strine:
  • Directors in the above-captioned case.
  • On December 6, 1999, we received courtesy copies of a Motion for Expedited Proceedings in
  • For the reasons set forth below, we do not believe that under the circumstances presented in
  • The Plaintiffs provide no satisfactory reason to justify imposing on the Defendants and this
  • announced a highly conditional tender offer for all of Shorewood's common stock at $17.25 per
  • written consents from Shorewood's stockholders to take certain actions without a stockholder
  • The Complaint alleges that the Shorewood Board breached its fiduciary duties when it adopted
  • the Complaint challenges the Shorewood Board's adoption of the so-called "Super-Majority" and
  • The Complaint raises two core issues: whether the Super-Majority and Consent Date Bylaws are
  • The Complaint challenges the Consent Date Bylaw on the ground that it "eliminateas a
  • Even a most cursory review confirms that this is not so.
  • The Consent Date Bylaw does not eliminate the stockholders' right to act by written consent
  • Prime Compufer, ITIC., Del.
  • No. 11104, slip op.
  • Edelman slip op.
  • Section 213 "clearly envisions that the board of directors shall have initial authority to
  • is silent with respect to the exercise of that power.
  • Anv Remaining Issues Require A Trial On The Merits
  • Even assuming that the validity of the Bylaws could be challenged, Plaintiffs' proposed
  • Plaintiffs' attempt to distinguish USACafes is without merit.
  • injunctive relief was sought on the ground that the bylaw amendments allegedly had an

  • 10 . COMPLAINT

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    CHESAPEAKE
    DEFENDANTS
    TENDER
    COMMON STOCK
    SHORE
    BYLAW
    STOCKHOLDERS
    DELAWARE
    PLAINTIFFS
    CONSENT SOLICITATION
    SUPER-MAJORITY BYLAW
    ACT
    LAW
    DIRECTORS
    BYLAW AMENDMENTS
    ACQUISITION
    PREMIUM TENDER
    SHOREWOOD PACKAGING
    PROPOSED ACQUISITION
    FIDUCIARY DUTIES
    RIGHTS PLAN
    WRITTEN CONSENT
    OUTSTANDING
    STOCKHOLDER FRANCHISE
    DEFENDANTS OWE
    GENERAL CORPORATION LAW
    PROPOSED MERGER
    INCORPORATION
    POTENTIAL ACQUISITION
    
                      IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
    
                                    IN AND FOR NEW CASTLE COUNTY
    
    CHESAPEAKE CORPORATION and
     SHEFFIELD, INC.,
    
                               Plaintiffs,
    
             V.
    
     MARC P. SHORE, HOWARD M.
     LIEBMAN, ANDREW N. SHORE,
     LEONARD J. VEREBAY, VIRGINIA A.                                                             /b
     KAMSKY, SHARON R. FAIRLEY, R.                                                               *     
     TIMOTHY O'DONNELL, KEVIN J.                                                                 <     
                                                                                                  i    
     BANNON, WILLIAM P. WEIDNER, and
     SHOREWOOD PACKAGING
     CORPORATION,
    
                               Defendants.
    
                                                  COMPLAINT
    
            Plaintiffs Chesapeake Corporation ("Chesapeake") and Sheflield,  Inc. ("Purchaser," jointly
    
    with Chesapeake, "Plaintiffs"), by and through its undersigned att'orneys,  upon knowledge as to
    
    themselves and their own acts and upon information and belief as to all other matters, allege for
    
    complaint against Marc P. Shore, Howard M. Liebman, Andrew  N. Shore, Leonard J. Verebay,
    
    Virginia A. Kamsky, Sharon R. Fairley, R. Timothy O'Donnell, Kevin J.  Bannon,  William P. Weidner
    
    (collectively, the "Director Defendants") and Shorewood Packaging Corporation ("Shorewood" or
    
    the "Company," together with the Director Defendants, the "Defendants"), as follows:
    
                                              NATURE OF THE ACTION
    
             1.        Plaintiffs commenced today a fully-financed, non-coercive, non-discriminatory,
    
    cash, all-shares premium tender offer for Shorewood's common stock at $17.25 per share (the
    
    "Tender Offer"). The $17.25 in cash offered in the Tender Offer represents approximately a 45%
    
    RLFl-2078660-5
    
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
  • MARC P. SHORE, HOWARD M. LIEBMAN, ANDREW N. SHORE,
  • SHOREWOOD PACKAGING CORPORATION,
  • Plaintiffs Chesapeake Corporation and Sheflield, Inc. ("Purchaser," jointly
  • (collectively, the "Director Defendants")
  • "Tender Offer").
  • premium over the closing price of Shorewood's common stock on November 9, 1999, the last full
  • Chesapeake proposes to acquire all of the outstanding shares of Shorewood.
  • Shorewood's remaining stockholders will receive an amount in cash equal to the price paid in
  • "Bylaws") to remove the provision establishing a staggered board of directors,
  • Consent Solicitation process set in motion at 3:00 p.m. yesterday.
  • their franchise rights (collectively, the "Bylaw Amendments").
  • The Super-Majority Bylaw also is invalid and ultra vires
  • under both the Shorewood certificate of incorporation and Delaware law.
  • the Tender Offer and Proposed Merger or to thwart the stockholder franchise and frustrate the
  • outstanding shares of Shorewood through the Proposed Acquisition.
  • Chesapeake identified Shorewood as a potential acquisition candidate
  • fully-financed, non-coercive, non-discriminatory, all-cash, all-shares premium Tender Offer.
  • General Corporation Law and the redemption or inapplicability of Shorewood's
  • stockholder rights plan.
  • actions by written consent without a stockholder meeting,
  • Ifelected, the Nominees will consider, subject to their fiduciary duties to Shorewood's
  • Shorewood Discloses The Bylaw Amendments
  • stockholders to act by written consent.
  • The Director Defendants owe Shorewood's stockholders the highest duties of care,
  •    |