LegalCaseDocs.com
shopping cart  
  |     
Search
 

 
New Visitors


 VeriSign Secure Site

 Get Adobe Reader

AUDIO VISUAL XPERTS v WALKER Click to find out why . . .



Keywords & Phrases
CaseNo: C.A. No. 17,261, CourtCode: CC, CourtName: IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE, Plaintiff: AUDIO VISUAL XPERTS, State: DE Delaware, UniqueCaseRef: DE>CC>00017261, County: New Castle County, Pennsylvania, Walker, Blackiston, Sahm, Defendant/third-party Plaintiff, Delaware, Demand, Avx-pennsylvania, Third-party, Motion, Direct Claims, Answering Defendants, Dismiss, Audio Visual Xperts, Support, Shareholder, Visual Xperts, Facts, Principles, Corporation Law, Messrs, Complaint, Pennsylvania Corporation, Averments, Chancery, Cuker, Sufficiency, Derivative Claims, Paragraph, Business Judgment Rule, Pennsylvania Suit, Counterclaims, Counterclaim, Preliminary Objections, Thomas , ContentID: 120239719

Case Documents
1 2000-03-31 ANSWER OF AUDIO VISUAL XPERTS AND THIRD PARTY DEFENDANTS TO COUNTERCLAIMS
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 101869
14 pages
PDF
2 2000-02-18 MEMORANDUM OPINION
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 100262
8 pages
PDF
3 2000-02-08 SUPPLEMENTAL REPLY BRIEF OF D. WALKER IN OPPOSITION TO DISMISSAL OF DERIVATIVE CLAIMS
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 102817
6 pages
PDF
4 2000-02-02 PLAINTIFF THIRD-PARTY DEFENDANTS SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO DISMISS DERIVATIVE CLAIMS
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 102818
10 pages
PDF
5 1999-11-29 PLAINTIFFS/THIRD PARTY DEFENDANTS REPLY BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO DISMISS
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 102819
20 pages
PDF
6 1999-11-15 ANSWERING BRIEF OF D. WALKER AND J. WALKER IN OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO DISMISS
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 102820
29 pages
PDF
7 1999-06-29 VERIFIED COMPLAINT
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 101870
7 pages
PDF
Total Documents: 7 documents , 94 pages
Price: $ 49.95


IVESLCD01 KGI0001
 
 

 Forgot your password?


1 . ANSWER OF AUDIO VISUAL XPERTS AND THIRD PARTY DEFENDANTS TO COUNTERCLAIMS

EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
WALKER
PENNSYLVANIA CORPORATION
AVERMENTS
VISUAL XPERTS
AUDIO VISUAL XPERTS
PARAGRAPH
BLACKISTON
THOMAS
WILLIAM
SAHM
JANET WALKER
ATTORNEYS
THIRD-PARTY
PLAINTIFFS
FULLY SET
WHEREFORE
COSTS
FEES
COUNTERCLAIM
DELAWARE CORPORATION
DEFENDANTS RESPECTFULLY REQUEST
RESPONSE
ANSWERING DEFENDANTS DEMAND
DEFENDANTS DEMAND JUDGMENT
AWARD ANSWERING DEFENDANTS
HEATHER BLACKISTON
PRAYER
INFORMATION SUFFICIENT
TRUTH
            IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE

                              IN AND FOR NEW CASTLE COUNTY

 AUDIO VISUAL XPERTS, INC., a                      C.A. No.:  17261-NC
 Pennsylvania corporation,
               Plaintiff/Third-Party Defendant
               V.
 DON G. WALKER,
               Defendant/Third-Party Plaintiff,
                and
 JANET WALKER,
               Third-Party Plaintiff,
               V.
 WILLIAM J. SAHM, JR.; THOMAS G.                                                 I.
 BLACKISTON; HEATHER BLACKISTON;
 AUDIO VISUAL XPERTS, INC., a
 Delaware corporation; AUDIO VISUAL
 XPERTS, INC., a Pennsylvania corporation;
 and WILMINGTON SAVINGS FUND
 SOCIETY, FSB,
               Third-Party Defendants.

              ANSWER OF PLAINTIFF/COUNTERCLAIM DEFENDANT
              AUDIO VISUAL XPERTS, INC., (a Pennsylvania corporation),
             AND THIRD-PARTY DEFENDANTS WILLIAM J. SAHM, JR.,
                THOMAS G. BLACKISTON, HEATHER BLACKISTON,
             AND AUDIO VISUAL XPERTS, INC., (a Delaware corporation),
              TO COUNTERCLAIMS AND THIRD-PARTY COMPLAINT
                       OF DON G. WALKER AND JANET WAILKER

              Plaintiff/Counterclaim Defendant Audio Visual Xperts, Inc. (a Pennsylvania

corporation) and Third-Party Defendants William J. Sahm, Jr., Thomas G. Blackiston, Heather

Blackiston, and Audio Visual Xperts, Inc. (a Delaware corporation) (collectively the "Answering

Defendants"), by and through their attorneys, Manta and Welge, hereby respond to the

Counterclaims and Third-Party Complaint of Don G. Walker and Janet Walker as follows:



          RESPONSE OF ANSWERING DEFENDANTS TO COUNTERCLAIM


                1.     Admitted in part, denied in part. Admitted that Don G. Walker and Janet

Walker have asserted certain counterclaims and third-party claims. It is denied that any of these
SNIPPETS:
  • JANET WALKER,
  • BLACKISTON; HEATHER BLACKISTON;
  • AUDIO VISUAL XPERTS, INC., a Delaware corporation; AUDIO VISUAL XPERTS, INC., a Pennsylvania
  • Third-Party Defendants.
  • THOMAS G. BLACKISTON, HEATHER BLACKISTON,
  • AND AUDIO VISUAL XPERTS, INC., (a Delaware corporation),
  • corporation) and Third-Party Defendants William J. Sahm, Jr., Thomas G. Blackiston, Heather
  • Defendants"), by and through their attorneys, Manta and Welge, hereby respond to the
  • Counterclaims and Third-Party Complaint of Don G. Walker and Janet Walker as follows:
  • RESPONSE OF ANSWERING DEFENDANTS TO COUNTERCLAIM
  • Answering Defendants are without knowledge or information sufficient to
  • form a belief as to the truth of these averments and, therefore, they are denied.
  • The avennents in this paragraph that are addressed to Defendants
  • Paragraphs 1-18 as though fully set forth.
  • prayer for reliefbe denied, and that Answering Defendants be awarded their costs and
  • WHEREFORE, Answering Defendants respectfully request that Don G. Walker's
  • Answering Defendants demand judgment in their favor and against
  • and award Answering Defendants costs and attorneys' fees incurred in this action.
  • Counterclaim and Third-Party Plaintiffs' claims are barred by waiver.

  • 2 . MEMORANDUM OPINION

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    COUNTERCLAIMS
    COURT
    PLAINTIFF
    DEFENDANTS
    WALKER
    DEMAND
    DISMISS
    PRINCIPLES
    BLACKISTON
    SAHM
    LAW
    DELAWARE
    CUKER
    CLOSELY-HELD
    FUNDS
    MOTION
    LITIGATION
    AUDIO VISUAL XPERTS
    THIRD-PARTY PLAINTIFF
    AVX-PA
    WILMINGTON
    ESQUIRE
    JUDGEMENT
    FAILURE
    SHAREHOLDER
    BREACHES
    MISAPPROPRIXION
    COMPLAINT
    STOCKHOLDER
    
          IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
    
                          IN AND FOR NEW CASTLE COUNTY
    
    AUDIO VISUAL XPERTS, INC., a
    Pennsylvania corporation,
                  Plaintiff/Third-Party Defendant, )
    
           V.                                       i     CA. No. 17261-NC
    
    DON G. WALKER,                                  I
                   Defendant/Third-Party Plaintiff, )
    
           and
    JANET WALKER
                   Third-Party Plaintiff,
    
    
    WILLIAM J. SAHM, JR.; THOMAS G.                 i
    BLACKISTON; HEATHER BLACKISTON;  )
    AUDIO VISUAL XPERTS, INC., a
    Delaware corporation; AUDIO VISUAL              i
    XPERTS, INC., a Pennsylvania corporation;       )
    and WILMINGTON SAVINGS FUND
    SOCIETY, FSB,                                   i
                   Third-Party Defendants.          >
    
                                 MEMORANDUM OPINlON
    
                                 Submitted: February 8,200O
                                 Decided: February 18, 2000
    
    Francis G.X. Pile& Esquire and Denise Adamucci, Esquire, of MANTA AND
    WELGE, Wilmington, Delaware; Attorneys for Plaintiff and Third-Party
    Defendants
    
    Daniel L. McKenty, Esquire and Steven F. Mones, Esquire, of MCCULLOUGH &
    McKENTY, P.A., Wilmington, Delaware; Attorneys for Defendant and Third-
    Party Plaintiffs.
    
    LAMB. Vice Chancellor
    
    
    
    
    
    
                                             I.
    
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
  • AUDIO VISUAL XPERTS, INC., a Pennsylvania corporation,
  • Defendant/Third-Party Plaintiff,)
  • BLACKISTON; HEATHER BLACKISTON;)
  • XPERTS, INC., a Pennsylvania corporation;) and WILMINGTON SAVINGS FUND
  • Francis G.X. Pile& Esquire and Denise Adamucci, Esquire, of MANTA AND WELGE, Wilmington,
  • At a January 26, 2000 hearing, I denied the plaintiffs' motion to dismiss
  • the defendant's individual counterclaims and reserved judgment with regard to
  • notwithstanding the failure by th.e shareholder to make a demand.
  • Don G. Walker, William J. Sahm, Jr.
  • When Sahm and Blackiston purported to
  • breaches of fiduciary duty by Sahm and Blackiston.'
  • funds and formed Audio Visual Xperts, Inc., a Delaware corporation, for the purpose of
  • as well as a motion to dismiss the complaint.
  • On June 29, 1999, Sahm and Blackiston caused AVX-Pa.
  • improper removal of Walker as a director, breach of a compensation contract, denial of access
  • ' Unlike Delaware law, Pennsylvania law does not embrace the concept of compulsory
  • the defendants in that case were able to withdraw their claims even though they were in all
  • Walker's counsel indicated that although the Pennsylvania action was temporarily stayed
  • Walker's wife, Janet, joined as a third-party plaintiff with respect to certain of the claims.
  • Count IV. Misapproprixion of corporate funds and taking of a corporate opportunity;
  • Cuker requires dismissal of all the derivative claims.
  • The issue in Cuker was "whether the `business judgment rule' permits the
  • Court also considered the American Law Institute Principles of Corporate
  • Principles to treat Walker's claims as individual.15 Walker is not a stockholder

  • 3 . SUPPLEMENTAL REPLY BRIEF OF D. WALKER IN OPPOSITION TO DISMISSAL OF DERIVATIVE CLAIMS

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    DERIVATIVE CLAIMS
    PENNSYLVANIA
    WALKER
    DISMISS
    PRINCIPLES
    CUKER
    DEFENDANTS
    PENNSYLVANIA SUPREME
    AUDIO VISUAL XPERTS
    PLAINTIFF
    ALI PRINCIPLES
    THIRD-PARTY
    FACTS
    BLACKISTON
    MOVANTS
    PENNSYLVANIA LAW
    DEMAND
    PUBLICATION
    AVX
    ADOPTION
    BAR
    DELAWARE CORPORATION
    THOMAS
    WILMINGTON
    DRAIN
    COUNTERCLAIMS
    MOTION
    DEL
    STANDARD
    
                        COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
                                        NEW CASTLE COUNTY
    
    AUDIO VISUAL XPERTS, INC.
           (a Pennsylvania corporation),
           Plaintiff/Third-Party Defendant      )     C.A. No. 17261 -NC
    
                            V.                  ;>
    DON G. WALKER,
           Defendant/Third-Party Plaintiff
                            and
    JANET WALKER,
           Third-Party Plaintiff
    
                            V.
    
    WILLIAM J. SAHM, JR.,
    THOMAS G. BLACKISTON,
    AUDIO VISUAL XPERTS, INC.
           (a Delaware corporation),
    AUDIO VISUAL XPERTS, INC.
           (a Pennsylvania corporation),
    WILMINGTON SAVINGS FUND
           SOCIETY, FSB, and
    HEATHER BLACKISTON,
           Third-Party Defendants
    
    
    
                        SUPPLEMENTAL REPLY BRIEF OF DON G:. WALKER
                     IN OPPOSITION TO DISMISSAL OF DERIVATIVE CLAIMS
    
    
    Richard A. Breuer                                 McCullough, McKenty & Kafader, P.A.
    30 South Valley Road                              Daniel L. McK:enty
    Paoli, PA 19301                                   Steven F. Mones
    61 o-647-4680                                     824 North Market Street, Fourth Floor
    Attorney for Don G. Walker and                    P. 0. Box 397
    Janet Walker                                      Wilmington, DE 19899-0397
                                                      302-655-6749
    
    February  8,200O
    
    
    
                                                      TABLE OF CONTENTS
    
    
    STATEMENT OF THE CASE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • AUDIO VISUAL XPERTS, INC. (a Pennsylvania corporation), Plaintiff/Third-Party Defendant) C.A.
  • Defendant/Third-Party Plaintiff
  • JANET WALKER,
  • WILLIAM J. SAHM, JR., THOMAS G. BLACKISTON, AUDIO VISUAL XPERTS, INC. (a Delaware
  • WILMINGTON SAVINGS FUND
  • HEATHER BLACKISTON,
  • Third-Party Defendants
  • The decision of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court in Cuker v. Mikdauskas,
  • 600,692 A.2d 1042 does not mandate dismissal of the derivative claims under the particular
  • Principles of Corporate Governance: Analysis and Recommena'ations.
  • Plaintiff, Audio Visual Xperts, Inc., and third-party defendants
  • and Heather Blackiston moved to dismiss the counterclaims and third-party claims of Don G.
  • Movants were granted leave to submit a supplemental brief in support of their motion to
  • The decision of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court in Cuker v. Mikalauskas,
  • There is no question that the substantive standard that determines whether the derivative
  • that Walker's derivative claims must be dismissed, since demand was not made.
  • that adoption was not in a vacuum.
  • The entire publication, all seven parts, is a comprehensive, cohesive work
  • in this case might implicate additional sections of the ALI Principles.
  • them if they are helpful and appear to be consistent with Pennsylvania law.
  • It should also be noted that except for Drain v.
  • In the case at bar, Walker is the only other stockholder of AVX, so that multiple derivative
  • as counterclaims in an action brought by the corporation.
  • timely brought (under Del Ch.
  • AVX stated at oral argument on January 26,2000, one of the objectives of AVX in filing its

  • 4 . PLAINTIFF THIRD-PARTY DEFENDANTS SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO DISMISS DERIVATIVE CLAIMS

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    PENNSYLVANIA
    DEFENDANTS
    THIRD-PARTY
    DISMISS
    CUKER
    COURT
    PLAINTIFF
    WALKER
    PRE-SUIT DEMAND
    PRINCIPLES
    DEMAND REQUIREMENTS
    AL1
    LAW
    THIRD-PARTY COMPLAINT
    DERIVATIVE CLAIMS
    MIKALAUSKAS
    DRAIN
    IRREPARABLE INJURY
    SUPREME
    SHAREHOLDER DERIVATIVE LITIGATION
    FAILURE
    AUDIO VISUAL XPERTS
    CORPORATE GOVERNANCE
    PENNSVLVANIA
    BAR ASSN
    SHOWING
    PORTIONS
    OFTHE
    EXCEPTION
    
                                                                                             44
                                                                                             d a
                  IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
                                 IN AND FOR NEW CASTLE COUNTY
    
    AUDIO VISUAL XPERTS, INC., a                              C.A. No.:  17261-NC
    Pennsylvania corporation,
                   Plaintiff/Third-Party Defendant,
    
    
    DON G. WALKER,
                   Defendant/Third-Party Plaintiff,
    
           and
    JANET WALKER
                   Third-Party Plaintiff,
    
           V.
    WILLIAM J. SAHM, JR.; THOMAS G.
    BLACKISTON; HEATHER BLACKISTON;
    AUDIO VISUAL XPERTS, INC., a
    Delaware corporation; AUDIO VISUAL
    XPERTS, INC., a Pennsylvania corporation;
    and WILMINGTON SAVINGS FUND
    SOCIETY, FSB,
                   Third-Party Defendants.
    
                  PLAINTIFF THIRD-PARTY DEFENDANTS' SUPPLEMENTAL
         BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF ITS MOTION TO DISMISS DERIVATIVE CLAIMS
    
                                                       MANTA AND WELGE
                                                       Francis G.X. Pileggi
                                                       Denise Adamucci
                                                       919 Market Street, Suite 1400
                                                       Wilmington, DE 1980 1
                                                       (302) 655-7460
                                                       Attorneys for Plaintiff and Third-Party
                                                       Defendants, William J. Sahm, Jr.; Thomas
                                                       G. Blackiston; Heather Blackiston; Audio
                                                       Visual Xperts, Inc., a Delaware corporation;
                                                       and Audio Visual Xperts, Inc., a
                                                       Pennsylvania corporation
    
    Dated: February  2,200O
    
    
    
                                             TABLE OF CONTENTS
    
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
  • Defendant/Third-Party Plaintiff,
  • JANET WALKER
  • AUDIO VISUAL XPERTS, INC., a Delaware corporation; AUDIO VISUAL XPERTS, INC., a Pennsylvania
  • Third-Party Defendants.
  • PLAINTIFF THIRD-PARTY DEFENDANTS' SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF ITS MOTION TO DISMISS
  • Qker v. Mikalauskas, 547 Pa.
  • Drain v. Covenant Life Insurance Co.,
  • AL1 Principles of Corporate Governance:
  • AL1 Principles
  • Luke J. Bergstrom, Supreme Court's Cuker Decision Clarifies Shareholder Derivative Litigation
  • Bar Assn.
  • Marc J. Sonnenfeld and Brady L. Green, Impact of the Pennsylvania Supreme ~urt's Adoption of
  • Supplemental Brief on the issue of whether, under Pennsylvania law, the Third-Party
  • ofthe Third-Party Complaint, should be dismissed because ofthe failure ofthe Third-Party
  • to make a pre-suit demand.
  • rule" abolished the futility exception unless irreparable injury would otherwise result).
  • exception to the pre-suit demand requirement in derivative actions under Pennsylvania Rule of
  • Pennsylvania's pre-suit demand requirements and further acknowledged that the portions of the
  • showing of any irreparable injury in the almost two years the parties have been litigating.

  • 5 . PLAINTIFFS/THIRD PARTY DEFENDANTS REPLY BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO DISMISS

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    DEFENDANT/THIRD-PARTY PLAINTIFF
    COURT
    PENNSYLVANIA
    DELAWARE
    WALKER
    THIRD-PARTY
    SUPPORT
    CORPORATION LAW
    CHANCERY
    MOTION
    FACTS
    BUSINESS JUDGMENT RULE
    DISMISS
    COMPLAINT
    CONCISE STATEMENT
    EXAMINATION
    BLACKISTON
    WILMINGTON SAVINGS FUND
    SUFFICIENCY
    COUNTERCLAIM/THIRD-PARTY COMPLAINT
    SHAREHOLDERS
    AUDIO VISUAL XPERTS
    VISUAL XPERTS
    ALLEGATIONS
    APPOINTMENT
    OPENING MEMORANDUM
    FSB
    NATURE
    RELEVANT FACTS
    
                  IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
                                 IN AND FOR NEW CASTLE COUNTY
    
    AUDIO VISUAL XPERTS, INC., a                       C.A. No.:  17261-NC
    Pennsylvania corporation,
                   Plaintiff/Third-Party Defendant,
            V.
    DON G. WALKER,
                   Defendant/Third-Party Plaintiff,
           and
    JANET WALKER,
                   Third-Party Plaintiff,
    
    WILLIAM J. SAHM, JR.; THOMAS G.
    BLACKISTON; HEATHER BLACKISTON;
    AUDIO VISUAL XPERTS, INC., a
    Delaware corporation; AUDIO VISUAL
    XPERTS, INC., a Pennsylvania corporation;
    and WILMINGTON SAVINGS FUND
    SOCIETY, FSB,
                   Third-Party Defendants.
    
                          PLAINTIFF'S/THIRD-PARTY DEFENDANTS'
                  REPLY BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF THEIR MOTION TO DISMISS
    
                                                         MANTA AND WELGE
                                                         Francis G.X. Pileggi
                                                         Robert Cavalier
                                                         919 Market Street, Suite 1400
                                                         Wilmington, DE 19801
                                                         (302) 6557460
                                                         Attorneys for Plaintiff and Third-Party
                                                         Defendants, William J. Sahm, Jr.;
                                                         Thomas G. Blackiston; Heather Blackiston;
                                                         Audio Visual Xperts, Inc., a Delaware
                                                         corporation; and Audio Visual Xperts, Inc., a
    DATED: November 29,1999                              Pennsylvania corporation
    
    
    
                                                    TABLE OF CONTENTS
    
    I.      STATEMENT OF THE NATURE AND STAGE OF THE PROCEEDINGS . . . . . . . . -2
    
    II.     CONCISE STATEMENT OF ALL RELEVANT FACTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3
    
    III.    CONCISE AND ACCURATE STATEMENT OF QUESTIONS INVOLVED
    
    IV      ARGUMENT.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
  • JANET WALKER,
  • Third-Party Plaintiff,
  • JR.; THOMAS G. BLACKISTON; HEATHER BLACKISTON;
  • AUDIO VISUAL XPERTS, INC., a Delaware corporation; AUDIO VISUAL XPERTS, INC., a Pennsylvania
  • SOCIETY, FSB,
  • Third-Party Defendants.
  • STATEMENT OF THE NATURE AND STAGE OF THE PROCEEDINGS.
  • CONCISE STATEMENT OF ALL RELEVANT FACTS.
  • Examination of Individual Counts
  • Delaware General Corporation Law Section 220
  • Seigel, The Erosion of the Law of Controlling Shareholders, 24 Del.
  • This is the Reply Brief in support of the Motion to Dismiss of Plaintiff Audio
  • Third-Party Complaint of defendant Walker, a disgruntled ex-employee who was fired from
  • Contrary to the retaliatory allegations by Defendant
  • VI, VII, XII and XIII are directed solely to third-party Defendant Wilmington Savings Fund
  • Defendant/third-party Plaintiff then states that only Counts IV and XI of the
  • counterclaim/third-party complaint are derivative.
  • Delaware cases on the Business Judgment Rule; a key issue in this case not only for purposes
  • Independence,"as analyzed in greater detail in Plaintiffs Opening Memorandum of Law.
  • Sufficiency of Non-Derivative Claims
  • Draconian relief of the appointment of a custodian - - which request was

  • 6 . ANSWERING BRIEF OF D. WALKER AND J. WALKER IN OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO DISMISS

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    PENNSYLVANIA
    COURT
    BLACKISTON
    SAHM
    AVX-PENNSYLVANIA
    DIRECT CLAIMS
    DEFENDANTS
    DEMAND
    MOTION
    PLAINTIFF
    SHAREHOLDER
    DELAWARE
    MESSRS
    DISMISS
    AUDIO VISUAL XPERTS
    THIRD-PARTY
    PENNSYLVANIA SUIT
    PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS
    DIRECTORS
    AMENDED COMPLAINT
    SUFFICIENCY
    WSFS
    COUNTERCLAIM
    LIABILITY
    THIRD-PARTY DEFENIIANTS WILLIAM
    CORPORATE RECORDS
    MINORITY SHAREHOLDER
    LITIGATION
    PROVISION
    
                       COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
                                      NEW CASTLE COUNTY
    
    AUDIO VISUAL, XPERTS, INC.                 >
            (a Pennsylvania corporation),      >
            Plaintiff/Third-Party Defendant    >     C.A. No.  17261-NC
                                               >
                            V.                 11
    DON G. WALKER,                             )
            Defendant/Third-Party Plaintiff    1
                            and                1
    JANET WALKER,                              >
            Third-Party Plaintiff              1
                            v.                 11
    WILLIAM J. SAf 1M, JR.,                    1
    THOMAS G. RLACKISTON,                      >
    AUDIO VISUAL XPERTS, INC.                  >
            (a Delaware corporation),          >
    AUDlO VISUAL XPERTS, INC.                  >
            (a Pennsylvania corporation),      >
    WILMINGTON SAVINGS FUND                    >
            SOCIETY, FSB, and                  >
    HEATHJZR  BLACK[STON,                      >
            Third-Party Defendants             >
    
         ANSWERlNG  BRIEF OF DEFENDANT/COUNTERCLAIM PLAINTIFF
         DON G. WALKER AND TEfIRD-PARTY  PLAINTIFF JANET WALKER
                       IN OPPOSITION TO THE MOTION TO DISMISS OF
     PLAINTIFF/COUNTERCLAJM  DEFENDANT AUDIO VISUAL XPERTS, INC.
      (A  PENNSYLVANfA  CORPORATION) AND THIRD-PARTY  DEFENIIANTS
            WILLIAM J. SAHM, JR, THOMAS G. BLACKLSTON, HEATffER
                       BLACKISTON, AND AUDfO VISUAL XPERTS, JNC.
                                  (A DELAWARE CORPORATION)
    
    Richard A. Breuer                                McCullougl~  & McKenty, P.A.
    30 South Valley Road                             Daniel L. McKenty
    Paoli, PA 19301                                  Steven F. Mones
    6  1 o-647-4680                                  824 North Market Street, Fourth Floor
    Attorney for Don G. Walker and                   P. 0. Box 397
    Janet Walker                                     Wilmingtoll,  DE  19899-0397
                                                     302-655-6749
                                                     Attorneys for Don G. Walker and
    November  15, 1999                               Janet Walker
    
    
    
                                               TABLE OF CONTENTS
    
    
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
  • (a Pennsylvania corporation),> Plaintiff/Third-Party Defendant> C.A.
  • ANSWERlNG BRIEF OF DEFENDANT/COUNTERCLAIM PLAINTIFF
  • DON G. WALKER AND TEfIRD-PARTY PLAINTIFF JANET WALKER
  • IN OPPOSITION TO THE MOTION TO DISMISS OF PLAINTIFF/COUNTERCLAJM DEFENDANT AUDIO VISUAL
  • BLACKISTON, AND AUDfO VISUAL XPERTS, JNC.
  • of a demand on the board of AVX-Pennsylvania.
  • under R. 23.1 by the proceedings in the Pennsylvania Suit.
  • In re Santa Fe Pacific Corporation Shareholder Litigation,
  • Litigation of that dispute began in Pennsylvania on July 6,
  • Audio Visual Xperts, Inc. filed
  • Mr. Walker counterclaimed against AVX-Pennsylvania and brought third-party claims
  • shareholders and directors of AVX-Pennsylvania.
  • Mr. Walker's claims against AVX-Pennsylvania and Messrs.
  • Walker was threatened with liability to WSFS on
  • (Counts VI and VII are against WSFS only and are not subjects of the pending motion.)
  • Count VIII fraud relating to the creation of the actual or threatened loan liability
  • AVX-Delaware) have moved to dismiss the Walkers' claims against them.
  • failure to comply with or be excused from the demand requirement of Del.
  • Preliminary objections by the Pennsylvania defendants to the original complaint.
  • challenging the legal sufficiency of the complaint.
  • Amended complaint, filed December 14, 1998.
  • The counterclaim is substantively similar, though not as elaborate, as the later claim of
  • The Court must initially delineate between direct claims and derivative claims,
  • board meeting, the withholding of corporate records from Walker,
  • Blackiston violate the cited provision of the Stock Purchase Agreement.

  • 7 . VERIFIED COMPLAINT

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    DEFENDANT
    FIDUCIARY DUTIES
    COMPLAINT
    ACCOUNT
    FUNDS
    BREACH
    IMPROPER
    OFFICER
    DEFENDANT WALKER
    PLAINTIFFS BOOKS
    MISAPPROPRIATION
    PERSONAL EXPENSES
    DUTY
    PLAINTIFFS ASSETS
    CHARGE
    PROPER
    PAY
    REASONABLE CARE
    SUFFER
    LOSSES
    PARAGRAPHS
    REFERENCE
    UNJUST ENRICHMENT
    REQUIRING DEFENDANT
    PREJUDGMENT
    AUDIO VISUAL XPERTS
    BUSINESS
    DELAWARE
    AUTHORIZATION
    
            QO '
    \       \
    `G e              @
                     `\
    i?+            g b                                                                              
            q-3
            \              IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE                           
                                          IN AND FOR NEW CASTLE COUNTY
    
                     Audio Visual Xperts, Inc.,
    
                                         Plaintiff
    
                                  V.
    
                     Don G. Walker,
    
                                         Defendant
    
    
                                                   VERIFIED COMPLAINT                  C',      ;
                                                                                       L-.1,;
                                                          PARTIES
    
                                 1.     Plaintiff, Audio Visual Xperts, Inc., is a Pennsylvania
    
                    corporation with its principal place of business currently located at 37 Lukens
    
                    Drive, New Castle, Delaware.
    
                                 2.     Defendant, Don G. Walker, is an individual owning a home in
    
                    the State of Delaware located at 10 Sixth Street, Rehoboth Beach, Delaware.
    
                                                      BACKGROUND
    
                                 3.     At all relevant times, Defendant was a director and officer of
    
                    Plaintiff serving as secretary and in charge of internal accounting. In that
    
                    Defendant Walker's duties and responsibilities included, among other things,
    
                    maintaining the Plaintiffs books and records.
    
                                 4.     During the time Defendant Walker was a director and officer of
    
                    the Plaintiff, Defendant Walker improperly diverted and misappropriated Plaintiffs
    
    
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • Plaintiff, Audio Visual Xperts, Inc., is a Pennsylvania
  • Drive, New Castle, Delaware.
  • Defendant was a director and officer of the
  • Plaintiff serving as secretary and in charge of internal accounting.
  • Defendant Walker improperly diverted and misappropriated Plaintiffs
  • funds to his personal use without authorization and without any proper corporate
  • Defendant would charge personal expenses to a credit
  • Plaintiffs checking account without any proper corporate
  • expenses that Defendant caused Plaintiff to pay or for any of the funds Defendant
  • and records of Plaintiff thereby causing Plaintiff to suffer losses.
  • BREACH OF FIDUCIARY DUTY
  • receivable for the Plaintiff and maintaining the Plaintiffs books and financial
  • Defendant's activities as averred in this Complaint constitute a
  • breach of his fiduciary duties to the Plaintiff and a waste of Plaintiffs assets.
  • Plaintiffs assets, as averred in this Complaint, Defendant must account to Plaintiff
  • Paragraphs 1 through 11 are hereby incorporated by reference.
  • improper conversion of Plaintiffs assets for Defendant's own use.
  • As a result of Defendant's unjust enrichment as averred in this
  • Defendant had a duty to exercise reasonable care in the
  • improper diversion and misappropriation of Plaintiffs assets to himself and also by
  • business practices and in such a manner that Plaintiff could accurately determine
  • Requiring Defendant to compensate Plaintiff for all losses
  • his fiduciary duties to Plaintiff and negligence with prejudgment interest, including but not
  •    |