LegalCaseDocs.com
shopping cart  
  |     
Search
 

 
New Visitors


 VeriSign Secure Site

 Get Adobe Reader

IN RE IXC COMMUNICATIONS Click to find out why . . .



Keywords & Phrases
CaseNo: C.A. No. 17,324, CourtCode: CC, CourtName: OCT-28-1999 THU 09 22 AM CHANCERY COURT CHAMBERS FAX NO, 302739617, State: DE Delaware, UniqueCaseRef: DE>CC>00017324, Plaintiff: GROSS, Ixc, Merger, Shareholders, Cbi, Merger Agreement, Gept, Directors, Vote Buying, Stockholders, Preliminarv, Agreement, Transaction, Vote, Del, Cincinnati Bell, Fiduciary Duties, Termination Fees, Disqualify, Delaware, Representation, Facts, Shares, Communications, Abbey Gardy, York, Subsidiaries, Injunction, Motion, Provision, Judgement, No-talk Provision, Kahle, Matter, Eclipse, Materials, Schreiber, Termination Fee, Common Stock, Wilmington, Stock, Expenses, Proposed Merger, Pension Trust , ContentID: 120239715

Case Documents
1 2000-06-29 ORDER
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 103581
5 pages
PDF
2 2000-05-26 STIPULATION AND ORDER RE: PROPOSED DISMISSAL
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 102790
11 pages
PDF
3 1999-10-27 MEMORANDUM OPINION
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 100255
27 pages
PDF
4 1999-10-18 JOINT REPLY BRIEF OF PLAINTIFFS IN SUPPORT OF THEIR MOTIONS
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 102791
38 pages
PDF
5 1999-09-21 PLAINTIFFS OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO DISQUALIFY AND RESPONSE TO OPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR ADMISSION PRO HAC VICE
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 102792
8 pages
PDF
6 1999-07-21 COMPLAINT
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 101823
7 pages
PDF
7 1999-07 AMENDED COMPLAINT
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 101822
7 pages
PDF
Total Documents: 7 documents , 103 pages
Price: $ 49.95


IVESLCD01 KGI0001
 
 

 Forgot your password?


1 . ORDER

EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
DEFENDANTS
ATTORNEYS
EXPENSES
PARENTS
SUBSIDIARIES
AFFILIATES
OFFICERS
KHEREAS
NEGOTIATIONS
FEES
AMOUNT
BANKERS
TRUSTEES
DIRECTORS
EMPLOYEES
AGENTS
REPRESENTATIVES
ADMINISTRATORS
SUCCESSORS
LAW
FACTS
MERGER
RELATING
TRANSACTIONS
OCCURRENCES
FIDUC
OBLIGATIONS
FOREGOING
ACCOUNTANTS
           .IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE

                        IN AND FOR NEW CASTLE COUNTY


IN RE I:l(C COMMUNICATIONS, INC.                CONSOLIDATED
SHAREHOLDERS LITIGATION                         C.A. No. X7324-NC/~
-___----                 -    -
JOHN D. CRAWFORD, et al.,

                   Plaintiffs,
                                                C.A. No. I.`7 334-NC
             V.

CINCINNATI BELL, INC., e-t al.,

                   Defendants.


                                    ORDER
                                    -      -

             WHEREAS, the parties have stipulated to the dismissal

of the above-captioned actions on the ground that they have

become moot; and

             KHEREAS, plaintiffs and defendants have engaged in

arm's-length negotiations to Icompromise plaintiffs' claim for

attorneys' fees and expenses and, in resolutio:n of plaintiffs'

claim,     Cincinnati. Bell Inc.          ("CBI") has agreed to pay to

plaintiffs' counsel attorneys' fees in t:he amount of $490,000

and expenses in the amount of $75,000 solely -to eliminate the

burden,     expense,    inconvenience,     and distraction of continued



litigation          over plaintiffs'               claim for            attorneys'      fees    and

expenses; and

              KHEREAS, due notice of the proposed dismissal of the
SNIPPETS:
  • plaintiffs and defendants have engaged in
  • arm's-length negotiations to Icompromise plaintiffs' claim for
  • attorneys' fees and expenses and,
  • plaintiffs' counsel attorneys' fees in t:he amount of $490,000
  • KHEREAS, due notice of the proposed dismissal of the
  • bankers, trustees, parents, affiliates, subsidiaries, general or
  • or former officers y directors,, employees, agents, attorneys,
  • representatives, estates, administrators, successors and assigns
  • ("Defendants' Affiliates"), whether under state or federal law,
  • relate:.n any way to, the facts or events alleged in Actions,
  • consideration of the Merger and any agreements and disclosures
  • relating thereto, an:r' acts, facts, matters, transactions,
  • occurrences;, conduct or representations relating to or arising
  • fiduc i.ary (and disc:Losur~e obligations of any of the Defendants
  • with respect to any of the foregoing
  • direc:tors, officers, agents, employees, attorneys, accountants,
  • administrators, successors and assi.gnees.

  • 2 . STIPULATION AND ORDER RE: PROPOSED DISMISSAL

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    PLAINTIFFS
    MERGER
    AGREEMENT
    DEFENDANTS
    ATTORNEYS
    DISMISSING
    DIRECTORS
    DISCLOSURE
    SHAREHOLDERS
    CBI
    COURT
    CONSOL
    STOCKHOLDERS
    FEES
    EXPENSES
    COUNSEL
    CRAWFORD ACTION
    WILMINGTON
    CINCINNATI BELL
    IVORY
    BREACHES
    VOTE
    ROSENTHALL
    MOOT
    MONHAIT
    AFFILIATES
    PARTNERS
    REARGUMENT
    EXHIBIT
    
           IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE            76
                       IN AND FOR NEW CASTLE COUNTY
    
    IN RE IXC COMMUNICATIONS, INC. )       CONSOLIDATED
    SHAREHOLDERS LITIGATION          1     C.A. No. 17324-NC
                                     )1
    JOHN D. CRAWFORD, et al.,        1)
                    Plaintiffs,      ))
              V.                     )
                                     )
    CINCINNATI BELL INC., et al.,    )1
                    Defendants.      1
    
              STIPULATION AND ORDER RE: PROPOSED DISMISSAL  2;::.  z
                                                                 4
              The parties hereto stipulate and agree as follows:
    
              1.    Five purported class action lawsuits were filed
    
    against IXC Communications, Inc. (,,IXC#), certain present and
    
    former members of the board of directors of IXC, Cincinnati Bell
    
    Inc. (",,I"), and Ivory Merger, Inc. ("Ivory") challenging the
    
    merger among IXC, CBI, and Ivory (the "Merger") pursuant to a
    
    merger agreement dated July 20, 1999 (the "Merger Agreement")
    
    and the disclosures related thereto.
    
              2.    Pursuant to a Court Order dated September 9,
    
    1999, four of the lawsuits were consolidated in an action styled
    
    In re IXC Communications, Inc. Shareholders Litiq., Consol. C.A.
    
    No. 17324 (the "Consolidated Action").      The remaining lawsuit is
    
    styled Crawford, et al. v. Cincinnati Bell Inc., et al., C.A.
    
    
    
    No. 17334 (the "Crawford Action"). Pursuant to the September 9,
    
    1999 Order, the Consolidated Action and Crawford Action were
    
    coordinated for pretrial proceedings.            The Consolidated Action
    
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • IN RE IXC COMMUNICATIONS, INC.) CONSOLIDATED
  • former members of the board of directors of IXC, Cincinnati Bell
  • Inc., and Ivory Merger, Inc. challenging the
  • merger agreement dated July 20,
  • In re IXC Communications, Inc. Shareholders Litiq., Consol.
  • the Consolidated Action and Crawford Action were
  • Plaintiffs in the Actions alleged,
  • duties to IXC's stockholders by failing to maximize shareholder
  • Plaintiffs also alleged that CBI and
  • Ivory aided and abetted the breaches of fiduciary duty by the
  • brief discussing their disclosure allegations.
  • Court denied plaintiffs' motions to enjoin the vote of IXC
  • Actions are now moot because,
  • attorneys are entitled to attorneys' fees for their services in
  • the litigation and reimbursement of their expenses because their
  • Plaintiffs and defendants, by their respective
  • counsel, have engaged in arm's-length negotiations to compromise
  • counsel for the plaintiffs in the Actions attorneys' fees in the
  • parents, affiliates, subsidiaries, general or limited partners,
  • subsidiaries), general partners, limited partners, partnerships,
  • Exhibit A attached hereto.
  • Wilmington, DE 19899
  • ROSENTHALL, MONHAIT, GROSS & GODDESS
  • the time for an appeal or reargument has expired with no appeal
  • dismissing the Actions has otherwise become final.

  • 3 . MEMORANDUM OPINION

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    IXC
    MERGER
    COURT
    PLAINTIFFS
    AGREEMENT
    VOTE
    DEFENDANTS
    GEPT
    FACTS
    DELAWARE
    YORK
    COMMUNICATIONS
    CBI
    PROVISION
    JUDGEMENT
    MATERIALS
    TERMINATION FEE
    PROPOSED MERGER
    PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
    TRANSACTION
    DIRECTORS
    BUSINESS JUDGMENT
    VOTE-BUYING
    ARRANGEMENT
    PROXY MATERIALS
    ALLEGATIONS
    WILMINGTON
    ABBEY GARDY
    ATTORNEYS
    
    OCT-28-1999 THU 09:22  AM CHANCERY COURT CHAMBERS                 FAX NO, 302739617$,              
                                                                                         .q+y:, g'
                                                                                                `/'.   
                                                                                                       
                                                                                                       
    
               IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
    
                                  IN AND FOR NEW CASTLE COUNTY
    
        IN  RE  IXC  COMMUNICATIONS, INC.                       )
        SHAREHOLDERS  LITIGATION                                1        CONSOLIDATED,/
                                                                >       C.A. No. 17324 4
        ---__--__-II------__--~~----~------*-eww-Y-s-r----- >
        JOHN D. CRAWFORD, et al.,                               >
    
                       Plaintiffs,                              >>
        V.                                                      >        C.A. No. 17334
                                                                >
        CINCINNATI BELL, INC., et. al.,                         >
    
                        Dcfmdants.                              1
    
    
                                          Submitted: October 20, 1999
                                           Decided: October 27, 1999
    
        Stephen E.  Jenkins, Richard D.  Hcins and Philip Trainer,  Jr. of  Ashby & &ddes,  Wilmington,
        Delaware; Joseph A. Rosenthal, Norman M. Monhait of Rosenthal, Monhajt, Gross & Goddess,
        Wilmington, Delaware. OF  COUNSEL: Lester L,  Levy  and  Chet  B. Waldman of  Wolr Popper,
        New  York, New York; Arthur  N. Abbey and Karin E. II-is& of Abbey Gardy & Squjijeri, New
        York, New York. Attorneys for PlaintiCf in C.A. No, 17334.
    
        Thomas  A.  Beck,  Daniel  A.  Dreisbach,  Robert  J.  Steam,  Jr.,  Srinivas M.  Raju,  Peter 
        and  James  Tobia  of  Richards,  Layton  &  Finger, Wilmington,  Delaware.              
        Defendants KC Communicalions, Inc.<, Wolfe Il. I3ragin, Joe C. Culp, Carl W'. McKinzie, Ralph
        J. Swctt, Phillip  L. Williams, Benjamn L. Scott: Richard Dirwin and 3011~ M, Zrno.
    
        Marlin  P.  `Tully, Jon  E,  Abrasnczyk,  and  Christopher  F.  Carlton  of  Morris,  Nichols, 
        Tunrtell,   Wilmin~on,  Delaware. OF  COUNSEL:  John  Bccrbower  of  Cravath,  Swaine  &
        Moore, New York, New York, Attorneys for Ivory Merger, Inc.
    
    
    
        STEELE, V.C.
    
    
    
    @CT-28-1999 THU 09:22 AM CHANCERY COURT CHAMBERS                  FAX NC. 3027396179               
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
  • of Ashby & &ddes, Wilmington, Delaware; Joseph A. Rosenthal, Norman M. Monhait of Rosenthal,
  • Lester L, Levy and Chet B. Waldman of Wolr Popper, New York, New York; Arthur N. Abbey and
  • Attorneys for PlaintiCf in C.A.
  • Defendants KC Communicalions, Inc.<, Wolfe Il.
  • John Bccrbower of Cravath, Swaine & Moore, New York, New York, Attorneys for Ivory Merger,
  • One] of the plaintiff shareholders of IXC Communications, Inc,, in these two
  • consolidated actions seeks to preliminarily enjoin: the October 29, 1999 vote
  • of the IXC shareholders on a proposed merger with Cincinnati Bclf, Inc,;
  • the enforcement of certain terms of the Merger Agreement.
  • in which shareholders will be free to exercise their judgment
  • support for their contentions that the TXC directors' breached their fiduciary duties
  • Plaintiffs, thcrcfore, arc not Iikcly to
  • communicated in some capacity about a joint transaction reads like a who's who of
  • Like many of the facts in this case,
  • The shareholders of IXC receive 2.0976 shares of CBI for every IXC
  • A mutual `"no-solicitation" provision preventing the
  • A $105 million termination fee and a cross-option agreement (which
  • This deal consisted of two ageements: the GEPT Stock Purchase
  • 1999 IXC distributed proxy materials to its shareholders
  • The CBl merger is rigged by vote-buying.
  • Plaintiffs may obtain a preliminary injunction if they establish the following
  • to the board's substantive business judgment and allow the shareholders to pass
  • The plaintiffs' rather strained allegations, often far removed from context,
  • Plaintiffs have shown that the GEPT deal has all the appearance of a votebuying arrangement.

  • 4 . JOINT REPLY BRIEF OF PLAINTIFFS IN SUPPORT OF THEIR MOTIONS

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    DEFENDANTS
    MERGER
    IXC
    COURT
    MERGER AGREEMENT
    CBI
    VOTE BUYING
    PRELIMINARV
    STOCKHOLDERS
    GEPT
    DIRECTORS
    DEL
    SHAREHOLDERS
    TRANSACTION
    TERMINATION FEES
    FIDUCIARY DUTIES
    INJUNCTION
    NO-TALK PROVISION
    SCHREIBER
    ATTORNEYS
    ABBEY GARDY
    IRREPARABLE HARM
    CALCULATION
    REASONABLENESS
    GEPT STOCK PURCHASE
    LLP
    ILLEGAL VOTE BUYING
    ENTERPRISE
    ACCORDING
    
                                           REDACTED  - FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION
    
    
                           IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
                                               IN AND FOR NEW CASTLE COUNTY
    
     IN RE IXC COMMUNICATIONS, INC.                                             CONSOLIDATED
     SHAREHOLDERS LITIGATION                                     ,'
                                                  C.A. No.  I7324-NC J
                                                                 1
     __________________--------------------------------------
     JOHN D. CRAWFORD, et al.,                                   i
    
                          Plaintiffs,                            i
                                                                                C.A. No.  I7334-NC
                V.                                               ;
                                                                 1
    CINCINNATI BELL, INC., ef al.,                                              FILED UNDER SEAL
                                                                 ;
                         Defendants.                             1
    
                                            JOINT REPLY BRIEF OF PLAINTIFFS
                                                  IN C.A. NOS. 17324 AND 17334
                                              IN SUPPORT OF THEIR MOTIONS
                                             FOR A PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
    
    ROSENTHAL MONHAIT, GROSS & GODDESS                                 ASHBY & GEDDES
    Joseph A. Rosenthal                                                Stephen E. Jenkins
    Norman M. Monhait                                                  Richard D. Heins
    Mellon Bank Center, Suite 1401                                     Philip Trainer, Jr.
    Wilmington. DE 19801                                               One Rodney Square
    (302) 656-4433                                                     P.O. Box 1150
                                                                       Wilmington, DE 19899
    WOLF POPPER LLP                                                    (302) 654- 1888
    Lester L. Levy
    Chet B. Waldman                                                    Attorneys for Plaintiffs in C.A.
    845 Third Avenue
    New York, NY 10022
    (212) 759-4600
    
    ABBEY GARDY & SQUITIERI. LLP
    .Arthur N. Abbey
    Karin E. Fisch
    2 12 E. 39'h Street
    New York, NY 10016
    (`2 12) 889-3700
    
    Attorneys for Plaintiffs in Cons. C.A. No. 17324
    
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
  • ABBEY GARDY & SQUITIERI.
  • LLP .Arthur N. Abbey Karin E. Fisch 2 12 E. 39'h Street New York,
  • Attorneys for Plaintiffs in Cons.
  • The Director Defendants Breached Their Fiduciary Duties
  • The Merger Agreement Was Uninfomled.
  • That The Stockholders Approve The Merger
  • Duties Above The Interests Of IXC Shareholders.
  • The Directors' Desire to Avoid Triggering
  • For GEPT.
  • The Termination Fees Are Excessive.

  • 5 . PLAINTIFFS OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO DISQUALIFY AND RESPONSE TO OPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR ADMISSION PRO HAC VICE

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    IXC
    REPRESENTATION
    DEFENDANTS
    MOTION
    KAHLE
    MATTER
    ECLIPSE
    SUBSIDIARIES
    PLAINTIFFS
    COURT
    LAW FIRM
    LAWYER
    LITIGATION
    CLIENT
    PARENT
    KAHLE AFF
    CHOPEK
    MOORE
    NLD
    ADMISSION PRO
    PRO HAT VICE
    ATTORNEYS
    CRAWFORD
    STOCKHOLDER
    DELAWARE
    ADVERSE
    BROOKLYN
    YARD
    INFOTECHNOLOGV
    
                                                                                                       
                                                                                                       
                                                                                                    /l
                   IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE                               !,"
    
                                      IN AND FOR NEW CASTLE COUNTY
    
    
    IN RE IXC COMMUNICATIONS, INC.                              >    C O N S O L I D A T E D
    SHAREHOLDERS LITIGATION                                     >    C.A. No. 17324-NC J/
                                                                >
    __I____--_---_------__________________I_----------------    >
    JOHN D. CRAWFORD, et al.,                                   >
                                                                >
                      Plaintiffs,                               >
                                                                >    C.A. No. 17334-NC
             v.                                                 >
    
    CINCINNATI BELL, INC., et al.,
    
                      Defendants.
    
    
                                PLAINTIFFS' OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS'
                      MOTION TO DISQUALIFY AND RESPONSE TO OPPOSITION
                                TO MOTION FOR ADMISSION PRO HAC VICE
    
    
             On September 13,1999, plaintiffs in C.A. No. 17334 moved for the admission pro hat
    
    aof Douglas C. Kahle, Esquire and Michael E. Moore, Esquire both of whom are members of
    
    the Virgini,a Bar and attorneys at the law firm of Pender & Coward (P&C). Defendant IXC
    
    Commu.nications, Inc. ("IXC") has opposed the motions for admission pro hat vice and has
    
    moved to disqualify Messrs. Kahle and Moore on the grounds that P&C represents IXC in a
    
    pending unrelated matter, and, that, therefore, Messrs. Kahle and Moore are ethically prohibited
    
    from representing the plaintiffs here against IXC. ' Defendants' motion to disqualify is based on
    
    a misunderstanding of both the facts and the law.
    
    
    
    
    I        Defendants' Opposition To Plaintiffs' Motion For Admission Pro Hat Vice And
    Defendants' Motion To Disqualify are together referred to as the ("Motion to Disqualify").
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • PLAINTIFFS' OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS'
  • MOTION TO DISQUALIFY AND RESPONSE TO OPPOSITION
  • TO MOTION FOR ADMISSION PRO HAC VICE
  • On September 13,1999, plaintiffs in C.A.
  • Defendant IXC
  • Kahle and Moore on the grounds that P&C represents IXC in a
  • , of which Crawford was the majority stockholder, merged with Network Long
  • Board of Directors of NLD.
  • Eclipse Telecommunications, Inc..
  • P&C does not - and never has - represented IXC in any matter.
  • Esquire ("Kahle Aff."
  • P&C represents Eclipse in litigation in Virginia State Court styled
  • Chopek v. NLD, Inc. (Kahle Aff.
  • P&C attorneys moving for admission pro hat vice here, have had any involvement in the Chopek
  • Court styled Communication TeleSystems International d/b/a WorldXChange Communications
  • matter by the Pennsylvania law firm of Green, Laveson, Goldberg & Rubenstone, not P&C.
  • Defendants appear to concede that only a current representation by P&C of IXC could provide
  • Infotechnologv is, however, fatal to the Motion to Disqualify.
  • According to Rule 1.7of the Delaware Lawyers' Rules of Professional
  • ";A lawyer shall not represent a client if the representation of that client will be directly
  • party adverse to the parent company.
  • but never represented the defendant or the parent corporation.
  • .a lawyer employed or retained by a corporation or similar entity owes his allegiance to the
  • Brooklyn Navy Yard
  • Brooklyn Navv Yard, 663 N.Y.S.2d at 500.
  • the Committee noted that it was principally addressing "situations where the subsidiaries in

  • 6 . COMPLAINT

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    MEMBERS
    DEFENDANTS
    IXC
    SHARES
    PENSION TRUST
    MERGER
    CINCINNATI BELL
    COMMON
    COMMON STOCK
    FIDUCIARY DUTIES
    COURT
    BRAGIN
    LAW
    VOTE
    ACTS
    TRANSACTION
    DAMAGES
    ADEQUATE
    ADJUDICATIONS
    INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
    CASH
    CONSUMMATE
    RICHARD
    COMMUNICATIONS
    DIRECTORS
    PROPER
    OUTSTANDING
    SHAREHOLDERS
    HOLDERS
    
               IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
    
                                    IN AND FOR NEW CASTLE COUNTY
    
    DR. MARK GROSS,
    
                                          Plaintiff,
    
                    - against  -                           Civil Action No.                    ;
                                                                                  ,._,I  /     (.  .j
     BENJAMIN L. SCOTT, RALPH J.                                                       `, i    i
                                                                                  4            ,.  -
     SWETT, RICHARD P. IRWIN, WOLFE H.
     BRAGIN, CARL W.  McKINZIE,   PHILLIP
     L. WILLIAMS, JOE C. CULP, and IXC
     COMMUNICATIONS CORP.,
    
    
     Defendants.
    
                                                COMPLAINT
    
                    Plaintiff, by his attorneys, alleges the following upon information and belief,
    
    except for those allegations which pertain to plaintiff, which allegations are based upon
    
    personal knowledge:
    
                                               THE PARTIES
    
                    1.       Plaintiff Dr. Mark Gross is and at all relevant times was  the owner of
    
    shares of the common stock of IXC Communications Corp.  ("IXC" or the "Company").
    
                    2.       IXC is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State
    
    of Delaware. IXC provides data and voice telecommunications transmission services. The
    
    Company owns and operates a coast-to-coast digital communications network, as well as owns
    
    long distance switches and ATM-frame relay switches. Customers include wireless
    
    companies, cable television providers, other long distance companies, Internet service
    
    providers, and government agencies.
    
    
    
                   3.     Defendant Benjamin L. Scott ("Scott") is Chairman of the Board of
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
  • Plaintiff, by his attorneys, alleges the following upon information and belief,
  • shares of the common stock of IXC Communications Corp..
  • Directors and Chief Executive Officer of the Company.
  • Defendants Ralph J. Swett, Richard P. Irwin, Wolfe
  • H. Bragin, Carl W. McKinzie, Phillip L,.
  • The individual defendants owe fiduciary duties of good faith, loyalty,
  • fair dealing, due care, and candor to plaintiff and the other members of the Class (as defined
  • General Electric Pension Trust.
  • outstanding held by hundreds of shareholders of record.
  • There are questions of law and fact which are common to
  • engage in a plan and scheme to benefit themselves, Cincinnati Bell and GE Pension Trust at
  • Class would create the risk of inconsistent or varying adjudications with respect to
  • injunctive relief on behalf of the Class as a whole is appropriate.
  • Holders with about 40 percent of IXC's outstanding shares have said they will vote in favor
  • of the transaction, including the 5 million shares from the GE Pension Trust.
  • a subsidiary of General Electric Company that acts as an investment
  • GE Pension Trust was offered a different (cash vs. stock),
  • The Merger transaction is an attempt to deny plaintiff and the other
  • and will consummate and close the proposed Merger complained of to the irreparable harm of
  • Plaintiff and the other members of the Class have no adequate remedy
  • declaring this action to be a proper class action and certifying plaintiff
  • other members of the Class for all damages suffered and to be suffered by them as the result

  • 7 . AMENDED COMPLAINT

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    IXC
    DEFENDANTS
    STOCK
    MEMBERS
    PLAINTIFF
    SHARES
    MERGER
    SHAREHOLDERS
    TRUST
    PENSION
    COMMON STOCK
    INDIVIDUAL DEFENDANTS
    REPRESENTING
    BRAGIN
    FIDUCIARY DUTIES
    VOTE
    PRICE
    TRANSACTION
    MERGER AGREEMENT
    SUFFER
    ACQUIESCENCE
    PUBLIC SHAREHOLDERS
    DECLINE
    IXC COMMUNICATIONS
    DIRECTORS
    BREACH
    OUTSTANDING
    DAMAGES
    PROTECT
    
                      IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE                                
                                                                                                       
                                           IN AND FOR NEW CASTLE COUNTY
    
     DR. MARK GROSS,
    
                                                       Plaintiff,
    
                          -. against  -                                C.A. No.  1732!4-NC
    
     BENJAMIN  I,. SCOTT, RALPH J.
     SWETT, RICHARD P. IRWIN,  WOL,FE H.
     BRAGIN, CARL W.  McKINZIE,  PHILLIP
     L. WILLIAMS, JOE C. CULP, JOHN
     ZRNO, IXC COMMUNICATIONS  lNC.,
     and CINCINNATI BELL, INC.
    
    
     Defendants.
    
                                                  AMENDED COMPLAINT
                                                  -       -                   -
    
                           Plaintiff alleges the following upon information and belief, except for those
    
    allegations which pertain to plaintiff, which allegations are based upon personal knowledge:
    
                                                               THE PARTIES
    
                           1.          Plainti.ff is and at all relevant times was the owner of' shares
    
    common stock of  IXC Communications Inc.  ("IXC"  or the "Company").
    
                           2.          IXC is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of
    
    of Delaware. IXC provides data and voice telecommunications transmission services. The
    
    Company owns and operates a coast-to-coast digital communications network, and owns long
    
    distance switches and ATM-frame relay switches. Customers include  wirel!ess companies,
    
    cable television providers, other long distance companies, Internet service providers, and
    
    government agencies.
    
    
    lhcif: 1032 17 Vcrk I 9730:0194
    
    
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • ZRNO, IXC COMMUNICATIONS lNC., and CINCINNATI BELL, INC.
  • Plaintiff alleges the following upon information and belief,
  • common stock of IXC Communications Inc..
  • Directors and was formerly Chief Executive Officer of the Company.
  • It is an aider and abettor of the breaches of fiduciary duties committed
  • by the individual defendants complained of herein.
  • Excluded from the Class are the defendants herein, members of their immediate
  • any of the defendants, as well as Cincinnati Bell, and General Electric Pensison Trust ("GE
  • Pension Trust'").
  • There are approximately 36.6 million shares of IXC common stock
  • outstanding held by hundreds of shareholders of record;
  • is an adequate representative of the Class and will fairly and adequately protect the
  • The Merger agreement entered into between Cincinnalri Bell and IXC
  • as it did following the Merger announcement, IXC shareholders would suffer even though the
  • of IXC's outstanding shares (including GE Pension Trust's total stake representing about
  • 26.3% of the shares outstanding) have said they will vote in favor of the transaction.
  • GE a cash price to lock: up their vote in favor of this agreernent.
  • Merger which has been bought and paid for with the acquiescence and full knowledge of the
  • to plaintiff and the Class by failing to protect IXC's public shareholders f&m a decline in
  • the individual defendants were aware that Cincinnati.
  • defendants will continue to breach their fiduciary duties owed to thle plaintiN and the
  • other members of the Class for all damages suffered and to be suffered by thlem as the result
  •    |