LegalCaseDocs.com
shopping cart  
  |     
Search
 

 
New Visitors


 VeriSign Secure Site

 Get Adobe Reader

E.I.DU PONT DE NEMOURS v CONOCO Click to find out why . . .



Keywords & Phrases
CaseNo: C.A. No. 16,638, CourtCode: CC, CourtName: IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DEILAWARE, Plaintiff: E.I.DU PONT DE NEMOURS, State: DE Delaware, UniqueCaseRef: DE>CC>00016638, President Casinos, President, Del, Transaction, Conoco, Pbhllc, Complaint, Party, Parties, Subsidiaries, Delaware, Motion, Demand, Chancery, Paragraph, Facts, Directors, Judgement, Chairman, Broadwater Properties, Supr, Stockholder, Conoco Admits, Conoco Denies, Nominal Damages, Dismiss, Mississippi, Esquire, Sharing Agreement, Amended Complaint, Dupont, Vaclavik Aff, Bankruptcy, Purchase, Arbitrator, Tax Sharing, Bhi, York, Broadwater Property, Vice, Cir, Jeca, Derivative Lawsuit , ContentID: 120239768

Case Documents
1 2001-12-21 OPENING BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 127224
12 pages
PDF
2 2001-07-24 REPLY BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON PLEADINGS FOR FAILURE TO JOIN INDISPENSABLE PARTY
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 127211
12 pages
PDF
3 2001-05 BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS FOR FAILURE TO JOIN AN INDISPENSABLE PARTY
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 115551
14 pages
PDF
4 2001-01-08 DEFENDANTS ANSWER TO FIRST AMENDED AND SUPPL. COMPLAINT
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 102120
9 pages
PDF
5   PLAINTIFFS BRIEF IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 115550
12 pages
PDF
6 1999-08-02 MEMORANDUM OPINION (CORRECTED
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 100352
3 pages
PDF
7 1999-07-22 MEMORANDUM OPINION
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 100353
14 pages
PDF
8 1999-04-30 PLAINTIFFS ANSWERING BRIEF IN OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO DISMISS
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 103083
18 pages
PDF
Total Documents: 8 documents , 94 pages
Price: $ 54.95


IVESLCD01 KGI0001
 
 

 Forgot your password?


1 . OPENING BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT

EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
NOMINAL DAMAGES
VACLAVIK AFF
COURT
MISSISSIPPI
BROADWATER PROPERTY
JECA
LLC
INVESTMENT
CASINO
DEFENDANTS
PURCHASE
APPRAISING
JUDGEMENT
PLAINTIFF
HOTEL
FINANCING
TRANSACTION
MOTION
FACTS
PAULSON
LLP
BILOXI
EQUITY INVESTMENT
PRIMADONNA
RULING
INCOME
AFFIDAVIT
MISSISSIPPI GAMING
RECOVER
              IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
                          lN AND FOR NEW CASTLE COUNTY

STEVEN M. MIZEL.
       Plaintiff.                                       1
vs.                                                            Civil Action No.  16638-NC
                                                        I
JOHN E. CONNELLY, JOHN S. AYLSWORTH,
TERRENCE L. WIRGINIS, KARL G. ANDREN,
and ROYAL P. WALKER, JR.,

       Defendants,

and

PRESIDENT CASINOS, lNC.,

       Nominal Defendant.


                             OPENING BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF
            DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT



                                        Stephen E. Herrmann
                                        Richards, Layton  & Finger
                                        One Rodney Square
                                        P.O. Box 551
                                        Wilmington, DE 19801                          .
                                        (302) 651-7730

                                        Attorneys for John S.  Aylsworth,   Terrenc$  L.
                                        Wirginis, Karl G. Andren, and Royal  P;  Walti&  Jr.
                                        and President Casinos, Inc.

OF COUNSEL:

Gerard K. Sandweg, Jr.
Lawrence C. Friedman
Thompson  Coburn LLP
One Mercantile Center
St. Louis, MO 63101
(3 14) 552-6000



                                                            TABLE OF CONTENTS

SNIPPETS:
  • IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
  • OPENING BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
  • PRESIDENT IS ENTITLED TO A DETERMlNATION THAT EVEN IF DAMAGES
  • of a 1997 transaction in which a subsidiary of President purchased resort property in Biloxi,
  • undisputed facts show that President has received substantial
  • income from the subsidiary well in excess of its $5 million equity investment.
  • not have received that income if it had not made the $5 million equity investment Plaintiff
  • may be awarded in this case are nominal damages.
  • referred to and attached to in the Vaclavik Affidavit.
  • this derivative suit challenges the 1997 purchase by a President subsidiary
  • of hotel resort property in Biloxi, Mississippi.
  • states, the Broadwater property was owned by JECA, a corporation wholly owned by John
  • properties to operate a dockside casino (Vaclavik Aff.
  • Connelly advised the board that JECA had been negotiating with Primadonna Resorts,
  • received an offer from Paulson Enterprises,
  • appraising the Broadwater property at $41.5 million.
  • The LLC acquired the Broadwater property from JECA.
  • California, Inc. and Cushman and Wakefield, Inc. in connection with securing financing to
  • Under Mississippi Gaming Law the casino could not have operated unless it
  • ruling here is -- is predicated on the fact that certain types of relief
  • establishes the fact of loss in a contract, but cannot establish an amount of loss, he may
  • Henry Gusky Blumling & Gusky LLP

  • 2 . REPLY BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON PLEADINGS FOR FAILURE TO JOIN INDISPENSABLE PARTY

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    PBHLLC
    PARTIES
    COURT
    SUBSIDIARIES
    PRESIDENT
    DELAWARE
    DEL
    BANKRUPTCY
    PARTY
    PARENT
    SHAREHOLDER LITIGATION
    TRANSACTION
    RESCISSION
    CORPORATIONS
    ABSENCE
    ABSENT PARTIES
    SUNSTATES
    DISMISS
    PROCEEDING
    PREJUDICE
    MAXXAM
    STRASSBURGER
    MISSISSIPPI
    MOVANTS
    CREDITORS
    DAMAGES
    BHI
    INDENTURES
    REMEDY
    
           IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
                                     IN AND FOR NEW CASTLE COUNTY
    
    
    STEVEN MIZEL,
    
                      Plaintiffs,
    
    V.
    
    
    JOHN E. CONNELLY, JOHN S.
    AYLSWORTH, TERRENCE L. WIRGINIS,
    KARL G. ANDREN, and
    ROYAL  P. WALKER,
    
                      Defendants,
    
               and
    
    PRESIDENT CASINOS, INC.,
    
                      Nominal Defendant.
    
    
    
               REPLY BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON
               THE PLEADlNGS  FOR FAILURE TO JOIN AN INDISPENSABLE
                         PARTY UNDER COURT OF CHANCERY RULE 19
    
    
    
    
    OF COUNSEL:                                    Stephen E. Herrmann
                                                   Richards, Layton & Finger
    Gerard K. Sandweg,  Jr.                        One Rodney Square
    Lawrence C. Friedman                           P.O. Box 551
    Thompson Coburn  LLP                           Wilmington, Delaware 19801
    One Firstar Plaza                              (302)651-7730
    St, Louis, Missouri 63 101
    (314)552-6000                                  Attorneys for John S. Aylsworth, Terrence
                                                   L. Wirginis, Karl G. Andren and Royal P.
                                                   Walker, Jr., and President Casinos, Inc.
    
    
    
    
    
    1635379
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
  • PARTY UNDER COURT OF CHANCERY RULE 19
  • Ltd. v. Uniholding Corp., Del.
  • In re Sunstates Corooration Shareholder Litigation,
  • Plaintiff concedes that the entity that entered into the transaction he is challenging
  • in this lawsuit is not President Casinos,
  • Hotel, LLC, a Mississippi limited liability company.
  • that PBHLLC was the entity entering into the transaction.
  • Movants' Answer in this case
  • ("both the parent and the subsidiary corporations are indispensable parties");
  • PBHLLC and BHI Are Indispensable Parties
  • PBHLLC's creditors would have absolute priority under the federal bankruptcy
  • (discussing the "absolute priority rule" in bankruptcy).
  • The relevant covenants in these indentures are essentially identical.
  • conscience" should allow this case to proceed in the absence of PBHLLC and BHI.'
  • prejudice to the absent parties as well as the existing parties.
  • Plaintiff seeks rescission of PBHLLC's acquisition of the Broadwater Properties,
  • Complaint and suggests that the Court can fashion a damages
  • remedy that will make President whole.
  • The cases Plaintiff cites, Strassburger v. Earley,
  • Ch., 752 A.2d 557, 578-82 and In re MAXXAM, Inc./Federated
  • whose claims are the subject of an ongoing bankruptcy proceeding.
  • dismissal here would not encourage Delaware companies to create non-Delaware subsidiaries to
  • Court should therefore dismiss with prejudice the above-captioned action based on lack

  • 3 . BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS FOR FAILURE TO JOIN AN INDISPENSABLE PARTY

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    DEL
    PLAINTIFF
    COURT
    PARTY
    CHANCERY
    PBHLLC
    SUBSIDIARIES
    DELAWARE
    DEFENDANTS
    MOTION
    JUDGEMENT
    CIR
    SUPR
    DERIVATIVE LAWSUIT
    INDISPENSABLE PARTIES
    PARENT CORPORATION
    PRESIDENT CASINOS
    BHI
    BROADWATER PROPERTIES
    BANKRUPTCY CODE
    FIDUCIARY DUTIES
    VICE CHANCELLOR
    VICE CHANCELLOR LAMB
    COMPLAINT
    PREJUDICE
    CREDITORS
    EXERCISE CONTROL
    AUTHORITIES
    LITIGATION
    
                                                                                ,-,                  
                                                                                 ,.J  :  .  .  I  :,-. 
    
    
           IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
                                   TN AND FOR NEW CASTLE COUNTY
    
    STEVEN MIZEL,
    
                   Plaintiffs,
                                                    i
    V.                                                           CA. No. 16638NC
                                                    5
    JOHN E. CONNELLY, JOHN S.
    AYLSWORTH, TERRENCE L. WIRGINIS.                i
    KARL G. ANDREN, and
    ROYAL P. WALKER,                                i
    
                  Defendants,
    
           and
    
    PRESIDENT CASINOS, INC.,
    
                   Nominal Defendant.
    
    
    
                       BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON
                  THE PLEADINGS FOR FAILURE              TO  JOIN AN INDISPENSABLE
                           PARTY  UNDER
                                          COURT  OF  CHANCERY RULE 19
    
    
    
    
    OF COUNSEL:                                 Stephen E. Herrmann
                                                James Tobia
                                                Richards, Layton & Finger
    Gerard K. Sandweg,  Jr.                     One Rodney Square
    Lawrence C. Friedman                        P.O. Box 55 I
    Thompson Coburn  LLP                        Wilmington, Delaware 19801
    One Firstar Plaza                           (302) 65 I-7730
    St. Louis, Missouri 63 10 1
    (3 14) 552-6000                             Attorneys for John S. Aylsworth, Terrence
                                                L. Wirginis, Karl G. Andren and Royal P.
                                                Walker, Jr., and President Casinos, Inc.
    
    
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
  • BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON
  • Tnr, v Rest lnt'l
  • F.2d 1142, 1148 (5"' Cir 1687).
  • Supr., 550 A.2d 1105, 1107 n.
  • Other Authorities:
  • Martin J. Bienestock, Syqxxbm -- CTtr@ssueminD aMFRetweenr;tndthe in Pnsses&rl's Fiduciary
  • Plaintiff filed this derivative action against President Casinos,
  • Hotel, LLC, or "PBHLLC"), purchased property from a company controlled by
  • Defendants President Casinos, Inc., John S. Aylsworth, Terrence IL.
  • because of Plaintiff' s failure to join PBHLLC as an indispensable party.
  • IMississippi (the "Broadwater Properties") from JECA.
  • reorganization by filing a petition in the United States Bankruptcy Code 111 the Southern
  • The Complaint should be dismissed pursuant to Del.
  • has failed to rneet the requirements for maintaining a double or triple derivative lawsuit.
  • regarding any demand made or any demand excused as to BHI and PBHLLC.'
  • of a parent corporation or holding company on behalf of its subsidiary company.
  • parent and the subsidiary corporations are indispensable parties);
  • 13284, Lamb, V.C Vice Chancellor Lamb attempted to distinguish
  • whetner the absence of the subsidiaries from the litigation is likely to prejudice them or
  • These are all issues that can be addressed fully should it appear that any of the claims
  • essentially the same fiduciary obligation to creditors and shareholders as would the trustee
  • it is an impermissible altempt to "exercise control

  • 4 . DEFENDANTS ANSWER TO FIRST AMENDED AND SUPPL. COMPLAINT

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    PARAGRAPH
    CONOCO ADMITS
    CONOCO DENIES
    SHARING AGREEMENT
    AMENDED COMPLAINT
    DUPONT
    ARBITRATOR
    TAX SHARING
    PARTIES
    FIRM
    DISPUTES
    COURT
    RESOLVE
    SELECTION
    SEPARATION AGREEMENT
    REPRESENTING
    TEXAS
    BAKER BOTTS
    DUAA
    CRITERIA
    RESPONSES
    DISAGREEMENT
    TAX ATTORNEY
    DELAWARE
    REQUESTING
    APPOINTMENT
    RESPECTFULLY DIRECTS
    ATTENTION
    COMMENCEMENT
    
                      IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DEILAWARE
    
                                      IN AND FOR NEW CASTLE COUNTY
    
    
    E.1. DU PONT DE NEMOURS
    and COMPANY,
    
                                Plaintiff,
                                                         1
                       V.                                1          Civil ActionNo.  16638NC
                                                         )
    CONOCO INC.,
    
                                 Defendant.              i
                                                                                                 g;
                                                                                              ski 0
                                                                                                 c  -  
                                              DEFENDANT'S ANSWER TO                           :$*6.  c
                                                                                                      
                                                                                                       2
                             FIRST AMENDED AND  WPPLEMENTAL   COMPILAINT   .?`.  ,                     
                                                                                             .A';'  Q  
                       COMES NOW Conoco Inc. (`Conoco") and files this its answer to the$&t*ndh.l:  ;$
                                                                                            -g 2;. 0 
    and Supplemental Complaint (the "Amended Complaint") tiled by E.I.  duPont  &$IerA()urs,&l-
                                                                                              2  6     
    Company ("DuPont"), as follows:
    
                        1.       With respect to paragraph 1 of the Amended Complaint, Conoco admits
    
    DuPont initiated this action pursuant to  9 5704 of the Delaware Uniform Arbitration Act  (10  Del.
    
    3 5704)  ("DUAA") requesting that the Court appoint an arbitrator to resolve disputes that have
    
    between DuPont and Conoco. Conoco further states that DuPont and Conoco are parties to a Tax
    
    Sharing Agreement dated as of October 27, 1998 (the "Tax Sharing Agreement") that provides for
    
    certain disputes to be arbitrated. Conoco denies that the agreement does not specie  the manner in
    
    which the arbitrator is to be selected, and respectfully directs the Court's attention to Section 8
    
    the Tax Sharing Agreement. Conoco admits that the parties were unable to mutually agree upon the
    
    appointment of an arbitrator prior to the commencement  of this action
    
    
    
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DEILAWARE
  • COMES NOW Conoco Inc. and files this its answer to the$&t*ndh.l:;$
  • and Supplemental Complaint (the "Amended Complaint") tiled by E.I. duPont
  • With respect to paragraph 1 of the Amended Complaint,
  • DuPont initiated this action pursuant to 9 5704 of the Delaware Uniform Arbitration Act (10
  • 5704) requesting that the Court appoint an arbitrator to resolve disputes that have arisen
  • Conoco further states that DuPont and Conoco are parties to a Tax
  • Sharing Agreement dated as of October 27, 1998 that provides for
  • certain disputes to be arbitrated.
  • the Tax Sharing Agreement.
  • Conoco admits that the parties were unable to mutually agree upon the
  • appointment of an arbitrator prior to the commencement of this action
  • this Court outlined a procedure for the appointment of an arbitrator,
  • and DuPont are parties to a litigation concerning the Separation Agreement.
  • Conoco denies all other allegations in paragraph 2.
  • Texas.
  • Conoco denies that Baker Botts was generally representing
  • DUAA bestows jurisdiction on the Delaware Court of Chancery to enforce arbitration agreements
  • Conoco respectfully directs the Court's attention to Section 8:
  • to resolve such dispute.
  • DuPont and Conoco shall jointly retain a tax attorney that is a member
  • which firm is independent of both parties,
  • the Tax Sharing Agreement does not provide criteria for the selection of the arbitrator.
  • disagreement arose concerning the manner of selection required or intended by Section 8 of
  • representing it with respect to the Tax Sharing Agreement or its negotiation.
  • Conoco repeats and realleges its responses to paragraphs 1 through 26

  • 5 . PLAINTIFFS BRIEF IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    PBHLLC
    PRESIDENT
    COURT
    DEL
    MOTION
    DIRECTORS
    CONNELLV
    SUBSIDIARIES
    PLAINTIFF
    FACTS
    BROADWATER
    DELAWARE
    PARTIES
    PARTY
    BROADWATER PROPERTIES
    ASSERTS
    LITIGATION
    DISMISS
    ABSENCE
    TRANSACTION
    BANKRUPTCY
    JOINDER
    JUDGEMENT
    YORK
    BELONGS
    DELAY
    FUND
    SUPR
    SUNSTATES
    
                                     ORIGINAL
               IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
    
                           IN AND FOR NEW CASTLE COUNTY
    
                              --_---_------ X
    STEVEN M. MIZEL,
    
                            Plaintiff,
         - against  -                               Civil Action No. 16638 NC
    
    JOHN E. CONNELLY, JOHN S.
    AYLSWORTH, TERRENCE L. WIRGINIS, :
    KARL G. ANDREN, and ROYAL P.
    WALKER,
    
                            Defendants,
    
         - and  -
    
    PRESIDENT CASINOS, INC.
    
                       Nominal Defendant.---i
    
                        PLAINTIFF'S BRIEF IN OPPOSITION TO  !'          ';;      :.
               DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR  JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS                 .i
                                                                        ,. _
                                                                         . 1
    
                                                                         c  1
                                          ROSENTHAL, MONHAIT, GROSS
                                             & GODDESS, P.A.
                                          Norman M. Monhait
                                          Suite 1401, Mellon Bank Center
                                          P.O. Box 1070
                                          Wilmington, Delaware 19899
                                           (302) 656-4433
    
                                          .Attorneys for Plaintiff
    
    OF COUNSEL:
    
    WECHSLER HARWOOD HALEBIAN
     & FEFFER, LLE'
    488 Madison Avenue
    New York, New York      10022
    (212) 935-7400
    
    June 18, 2001
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
  • New York, New York 10022
  • STATEMENT OE' FACTS
  • THE DERIVATIVE CLAIM PLAINTIFF ASSERTS BELONGS
  • DEFENDANTS' DELAY IN PRESENTING THIS MOTION
  • Desert Equities Inc. v. Morqan Stanley Leverased Equity Fund, Del.
  • Supr., 752 A.2d.
  • In Re Sunstates Corp. Sharmtder Litiq.,
  • This litigation has been pending for more than two and onehalf years during which the parties
  • without the presence as a party of President Broadwater Hctel LLC
  • absence, which has been obvious from the start of the case, is
  • President's public filings say that PBHLLC,
  • President and Connelly are already parties to this action.
  • automatic st,ay the PBHLLC bankruptcy proceedings would provide.
  • Defendants' belated and cynical joinder argument ignores the
  • action taken by President's Board of Directors and only implemented
  • of the Broadwater Properties did not come from PBHLLC,
  • Since defendants have moved for judgment on the pleadings,
  • defendants' motion to dismiss, Mizel v. Connellv, Del.
  • THE DERIVATIVE CLAIMPLAINTIFF ASSERTS BELONGS TO PRESIDENT
  • challenged transaction.
  • incentivize .Delaware boards of directors to set up or use nonDelaware subsidiaries as
  • DEFENDANTS' DELAY IN PRESENTING THIS MOTION REQUIRES ITS

  • 6 . MEMORANDUM OPINION (CORRECTED)

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    ESQUIRE
    PLAINTIFFS
    DEMAND
    DEL
    MOTION
    DISMISS
    YORK CRUISE
    CIRCLE-LINE
    COMPLAINT
    AFFIDAVIT
    COURT
    CHANCERY
    ALLEGATIONS
    DISCOVERY
    SUPPORT
    PLEADING
    SUPR
    KAHN
    TREMONT
    MEM
    MONHAIT
    GROSS
    WILMINGTON
    COUNSEL
    ATTORNEYS
    PRINCIPLE
    FAMILIES
    STAKE
    TEXACO
    
          IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
    
                          IN AND FOR NEW CASTLE COUNTY
    
    
    STEVEN M .  MIZEL,                      >
    
                        Plaintiff,          >
                                            >
          V.                                >
                                            >    Civil Action No. 16638
    JOHN E. CONNELLY, JOHN S.               >
    AYLSWORTH,  TERRENCE L.                 >
    WIRGINIS, KARL G. ANDREN,               >
    and ROYAL P. WALKER, JR.,               >
    
                        Defendants,
          and
    
    PRESIDENT CASINOS, INC.,
    
                 Nominal Defendant.
    
                                 MEMORANDUM OPINION
    
                                Date Submitted: July l9, 1999
                                 Date Decided: July 22, 1999
                               Date Corrected: August 2, 1999
    
    Norman M. Monhait, Esquire, Carmella P. Keener, Esquire, of ROSENTHAL
    MONHAIT GROSS & GODDESS, Wilmington, DE; OF COUNSEL: Matthew M.
    Houston, Esquire, of WECHSLER HARWOOD HALEBIAN  & FEFFER, New
    York, NY,, Attorneys for Plaintiffs"
    
    Stephen E. Herrmann, Esquire, of RICHARDS, LAYTON Ck FINGER, Wilmington,
    DE; OF COUNSEL: Gerard K. Sandweg, Jr., Esquire, Lawrence C. Friedman,
    Esquire, of THOMAS COBURN, St. Louis, MO, Attorneys for Defendants.
    
    
    STRINE, Vice Chancellor
    
    
    
                                                      V.
    
            Finally, plaintiff also pleads that defendant Andren is beholden to
    
    Connelly because Andren is the Chairman of #Circle-Line, a company that is
    
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
  • Norman M. Monhait, Esquire, Carmella P. Keener, Esquire, of ROSENTHAL MONHAIT GROSS &
  • Stephen E. Herrmann, Esquire, of RICHARDS, LAYTON Ck FINGER, Wilmington, DE; OF COUNSEL:
  • plaintiff also pleads that defendant Andren is beholden to
  • Since Andren's "position with Circle-Line constitutes his principal employment and means of
  • the complaint raises a reasonable doubt that.
  • submitted an affidavit stating that neither Circle-Line nor New York Cruise
  • plaintiffs assertio:ns, Andren contends that Connelly controlled a partnership
  • motion to dismiss since such a motion is directed to the face of the
  • rescinded cannot, in appropriate circumstances, thereby meet its burden to create a
  • To the extent that Seibert can be read as standing more broadly for the proposition that
  • Good v. Texaco, Inc., Del.
  • allegations of the complaint,.
  • affidavit or discovery by either the plaintiff or the defendants.").
  • allowing a defendant to introduce affidavits in support of a Rule 23.1 motion
  • to dismiss would create a gross imbalance since "plaintiffs.
  • Supr., 591 A.2d 194, 208-210.
  • See Kahn v. Tremont Corp.,
  • No. 12339, mem.
  • "If a factual allegation that establishes as a pleading matter a demand-excused case can be
  • Even though this requirement might seem a bit disturbing in this precise circumstance, I note

  • 7 . MEMORANDUM OPINION

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    TRANSACTION
    DEFENDANTS
    PLAINTIFF
    COMPLAINT
    COURT
    CHAIRMAN
    STOCKHOLDER
    DEMAND
    ESQUIRE
    VICE
    FACTS
    DEL
    CHANCERY
    YORK
    DIRECTORS
    WIRGINIS
    DELAWARE
    NOMINAL DEFENDANT
    ATTORNEYS
    CHANCELLOR
    CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
    SUBORDINATES
    MAJORITY
    IMPARTIALITY
    AYLSWORTH
    IROSENTHAL MONHAIT GROSS
    WILMINGTON
    FRIEDMAN
    MANAGEMENT SUBORDINATES
    
                                                                                         /
    
    
    
          IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
    
                         IN AND FOR NEW CASTLE COUNTY
    
    
    STEVEN M. MIZEL,                       >>
                       Plaintiff,          >>
          V.                               >
                                           >     Civil Action No. 16638
    JOHN E. CONNE:LL,Y,  JOHN S.           )                               i
    AYLSWORTH, TERRENCE L.                 )                      7.       z  :
    WIRGINIS, KARL G. ANDREN,              )                               : 1
                                                                                I  "
    and ROYAL P. WALKER, JR.,              >                                    :  1
                                           >                                    li.i
                       Defendants,                                              y--.
                                           >                                    I *
          and                              >                                    i'["7
                                           >                                     E&x?
    PRESIDENT CASINOS, INC.,               >
    
                 Nominal Defendant.  )
    
                                MEMORANDUM OPINION
    
                               Date Submitted: July 19, 1.999
                                Date Decided: July 22, 1999
    
    No-man M. Monhait, Esquire, Carmella P. Keener, Esquire, of IROSENTHAL
    MONHAIT GROSS & GODDESS, Wilmington, DE; OF COUNSEL: Matthew M.
    Ho.uston, Esquire, of WECHSLER HARWOOD  HALEBIAN  & FEFFER, New
    York, NY, Attorneys for Plaintiffs.
    
    Stephen E. Herrmann, Esquire, of RICHARDS, LAYTON &; FINGER, Wilmington,
    DE; OF  COUNSIEL: Gerard K. Sandweg, Jr., Esquire, Lawrence C. Friedman,
    Esquire, of THOMAS COBURN, St. Louis, MO, Attorneys for Defenldants.
    
    
    STRINE, Vice Chancellor
    
    
    
          The derivative complaint in this case challenges a transaction between
    
    nominal defendant President Casinos, Inc. and a corporation wholly owned
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
  • No-man M. Monhait, Esquire, Carmella P. Keener, Esquire, of IROSENTHAL MONHAIT GROSS &
  • STRINE, Vice Chancellor
  • The derivative complaint in this case challenges a transaction between
  • nominal defendant President Casinos, Inc. and a corporation wholly owned
  • majority of the board of directors of President Casinos.
  • subordinates, a reasonable doubt exists regarding the independence of the
  • Rales v. Blasband, Del.
  • demand is excused and the defendants' motion to dismiss
  • A brief recitation of the pertinent facts from the complaint is all that is
  • John E. Connelly - - President Casinos' Chairman, CEO, an-d 32.7 % stockholder;
  • Royal P. Walker - - President Casinos' director whose independence is conceded by the
  • defendants, othler than Connelly, to consider a demand impartially.
  • Aylsworth, Wirginis, and Andren are beholden to him for their livelihoods.
  • ' Friedman v. Beningson, Del.
  • Based on these facts, Chancellor Allen came to the following conclusion regarding Beningson's
  • "impartiality might reasonably be questioned").

  • 8 . PLAINTIFFS ANSWERING BRIEF IN OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO DISMISS

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    PRESIDENT CASINOS
    DEFENDANTS
    BROADWATER PROPERTIES
    PLAINTIFF
    ALLEGES
    DEMAND
    COMPLAINT
    CONTROL
    TRANSACTION
    REASONS
    DIRECTORS
    MOTION
    SUPR
    CMP
    PURCHASE
    FACTS
    COURT
    DISMISS
    CONFLICT
    EMPLOYMENT
    EVIDENCE
    OFFICER
    STOCK
    SHAREHOLDERS
    CONSIDERATIONS
    STANDARD
    SPECIAL COMMITTEE
    JUDGEMENT
    ALLEGATIONS
    
               IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
    
                          IN AND FOR NEW CASTLE COUNTY
    ---------------------------------- -X
    STEVEN M. MIZEL,
                                               :
                            Plaintiff,
         - against  -                          ::
    JOHN E. CONNELLY, JOHN S.                  :
    AYLSWORTH, TERRENCE L. WIRGINIS, :               Civil Action No. 16638
    KARL G. ANDREN, and ROYAL P.               :
    WALKER,                                    ::
                            Defendants,        :
    
         - and --
                                               :
    PRESIDENT CASINOS, INC.
                                               :                              '
                       Nominal Defendant. :
    
    
    
    
                         PLAINTIFF'S ANSWERING BRIEF IN
                   OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS
    
    
    
                                          ROSENTHAL MONHAIT
                                           GROSS SC GODDESS, P.A.
                                          Norman M. Monhait
                                          Suite 1401, Mellon Bank Center
                                          P.O. Box 1070
                                          Wilmington, Delaware       19899-1070
                                          (302) 656-4433
    
                                          Attorneys for Plaintiff
    
    OF COUNSEL:
    
    WECHSLER HARWOOD
     HALEBIAN  & FEFFER LLP
    488 Madison Avenue
    New York, NY 10022
    (212) 935-7400
    
    April 30, 1999
    
    
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
  • OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS
  • PLAINTIFF HAS SUFFICIENTLY ALLEGED A
  • CASINO DIRECTORS JUSTIFYING EXCUSAL OF DEMAND
  • PURCHASE OF THE BROADWATER PROPERTIES WAS NOT
  • Cede & Co. v. Technicolor, Inc., Del.
  • Supr., 634 A.2d 345
  • Scattered Corp. v. Chicaso Stock Exchange, Inc., Del.
  • Defendants, who are the directors of President Casinos,
  • The conflict on the board is readily apparent.
  • Officer and principal shareholder, stands as both a seller and a
  • President Casinos and is therefore obliged to Connelly for his continued employment.
  • After even a cursory review of the Complaint,
  • fairness of the Broadwater Properties transaction.
  • President Casinos and its shareholders and why pre-suit demand
  • STATEMENT OF FACTS
  • (Cmp.
  • The Complaint specifically alleges that the $40.5 million
  • director independence or the exercise of proper business judgment.
  • The "reasonable doubt" standard is not a restrictive evidentiary test.
  • The Court should not force a plaintiff "to plead evidence without the benefit of discovery."
  • The issue at hand is whether the Complaint's allegations
  • director's ability to decide a matter on its corporate merits without regard to "extraneous
  • It should be further noted that in the minutes for the Board of Directors meeting held on
  • at this level raises a more than reasonable inference of control
  • For all the foregoing reasons,
  •    |