LegalCaseDocs.com
shopping cart  
  |     
Search
 

 
New Visitors


 VeriSign Secure Site

 Get Adobe Reader

DECKARD v LUCENTE Click to find out why . . .



Keywords & Phrases
CaseNo: C.A. No. 18,286, CourtCode: CC, CourtName: IN TH E COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE, Plaintiff: DECKARD, State: DE Delaware, UniqueCaseRef: DE>CC>00018286, Qms, Minolta Investments, Stockholders, Tender, Merger, Shares, Minolta, Shareholders, Common Stock, Facts, Motion, Cash, Class Action, Disclosure, Transaction, Outstanding Common, Compl, Special Committee, Del, Amended Complaint, Directors, Ownership, Majority Shareholder, Thereafter Pursuing Litigation, Challenging, Corn, Public Stockholders, Qms Board, Fairness Opinion, Short-form Merger, Minority Shareholders, Allegation, Cash Flow Analysis, Plaintiff William Deckard , ContentID: 120240172

Case Documents
1 2001-05-04 DEFENDANTS OPENING BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO DISMISS
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 115432
20 pages
PDF
2 2001-02-14 INC CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 115252
16 pages
PDF
3 2000-09 COMPLAINT
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 100912
6 pages
PDF
Total Documents: 3 documents , 42 pages
Price: $ 29.95


IVESLCD01 KGI0001
 
 

 Forgot your password?


1 . DEFENDANTS OPENING BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO DISMISS

EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
STOCKHOLDERS
MINOLTA
QMS
FACTS
MOTION
PLAINTIFF
DISCLOSURE
MERGER
COMPL
DEFENDANTS
DEL
AMENDED COMPLAINT
TRANSACTION
SHARES
THEREAFTER PURSUING LITIGATION
CHALLENGING
CORN
SPECIAL COMMITTEE
DIRECTORS
ALLEGATION
PUBLIC STOCKHOLDERS
ROBINSON-HUMPHREY VALUATION REPORT
FACTS RELEVANT
COMMON STOCK
QMS BOARD
VALUATION REPORT
ACQUIESCENCE
CHARTER PROVISION
FIDUCIARY DUTY
               IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE                                   
                                  IN AND FOR NEW CASTLE COUNTY                                     
                                                                                                   

________-____-__________________________----------  x

IN RE MINOLTA-QMS,  INC.                                                           CONSOLIDATED
SHAREHOLDERS LITIGATION                                                            C.A. NO. 18286 NC

--------------------------------------------~--.-----------------x                                 
                                                                                               o 7:
                                                                                               -r,\
                                                                                                   
                                                                                               ;" 
                                                                                                   
                                                                                                   
                                  DEFENDANTS'  OPENING  BRIEF IN                               i   
                            SUPPORT OF THEIR MOTION TO DISMISS                                 ;.;.
                                                                                               _   
                                                                                              
                                                       MORRIS, NICHOLS, ARSHT & T@$EL:
                                                                                                   
                                                       A. Gilchrist Sparks, III                    
OF COUNSEL:                                             S. Mark Hurd
                                                        1201 N. Market :Street
Greg A. Danilow                                        P.O. Box 1347
Richard L. Levine                                      Wilmington, DE 19899-1347
WEIL, GOTSHAL  & MANGES LLP                             (302) 658-9200
767 Fifth Avenue                                           Attorneys for Defendants Minolta-QMS,
New York, NY lo153                                         Inc., Minolta Investments Company,
(212) 310-8000                                             Edward E. Lacente, Albert A. Butler,
                                                           Hiroshi Fujii,  Ryusho Kutani, Yoshisuke
                                                           Takekida, Shoei  Yamana, and Allen A.
                                                           Hans

                                                                        - and -

                                                        RICHARDS, LAYTON  & FINGER
                                                       Kevin G. Abrams
                                                        One Rodney Square
                                                       P.O. Box 55 1
                                                        Wilmington, DE; 19899
                                                        (302) 6.58-6541
                                                           Attorneys for Defendants F. Rigdon
                                                           Currie,  Michael C. Dow, William R.
May 4,200l                                                 Bowles and Robert 1. Materna



SNIPPETS:
  • NATURE AND STAGE OF PROCEEDINGS PRELIMINARY STATEMENT STATEMENT OF FACTS
  • The Parties B. Facts Relevant To This Motion
  • THIS,4CTION S H O U L D B E DIS'.MISSED B E C A U S E A STOCKHOLDER WHO VOLUNTARILY ACCEPTS
  • PLAINTCFF'S C L A I M S A G A I N S T T H E D I R E C T O R S N O T A F F I L I A T E D W I T
  • Bershad v. Curtiss-Wright Corn.,
  • In re Freeport-McMoRan Sulphur, Inc. S'holders Litig, Del.
  • On March 23, 2001, defendants Minolta-QMS, Inc., Minolta
  • QMS Defendants, the "Defendants") filed a motion to dismiss the Amended Consolidated Class
  • Action Complaint (the "Amended Complaint" or "Am. Compl.") pursuant to Court of Chancery
  • fairness of that transaction in subsequent litigation.
  • plaintiff seeks to do here.
  • After negotiating with a Special Committee of QMS' board of directors,
  • Plaintiff then received the valuation report of the financial advisor to the Special
  • Then, and only then, plaintiff voluntarily tendered his QMS shares to MIC for the
  • QMS' stockholders have provided the directors of the
  • which allows stockholders to vote -- as QMS' stockholders have voted -- to
  • Pliaintiff William Deckard was an owner of QMS common stock at the time he
  • Currie, Dow, and Matema were members of the board of directors of QMS (the "QMS Board")
  • entity which survived the merger.
  • fiduciary duties to QMS and its public stockholders as a result of Minolta's ofikr.
  • The Schedule 14:D-9 also included a summary of the Robinson-Humphrey valuation report
  • The doctrine of acquiescence is a long-standing and well-settled rule of Delaware
  • While there was not a 17 month period between the filing of the original complaint and the
  • alleging a breach of fiduciary duty.
  • Snpr., 726 A..2d 1215, precludes this Court from considering the dispositive effect of an

  • 2 . INC CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    QMS
    DEFENDANTS
    PLAINTIFF
    SHARES
    MERGER
    SHAREHOLDERS
    COMMON STOCK
    CASH
    CLASS ACTION
    OUTSTANDING COMMON
    OWNERSHIP
    STOCKHOLDERS
    MAJORITY SHAREHOLDER
    TENDER
    SPECIAL COMMITTEE
    FAIRNESS OPINION
    SHORT-FORM MERGER
    TRANSACTION
    MINORITY SHAREHOLDERS
    CASH FLOW ANALYSIS
    PLAINTIFF WILLIAM DECKARD
    SUBSEQUENT SHORT-FORM MERGER
    SUPPORTED INTELLIGENT CONTROLLERS
    IMAGING SYSTEMS
    QMS BOARD
    PUBLIC STOCKHOLDERS
    RELEVANT TIMES
    FIDUCIARY RELATIONSHIP
    INDIVIDUAL DEFENDANTS
    
                                                  ORIGINAL
                    IN  TH[E COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE                                
                                       IN AND FOR NEW CASTLE COUNTY
    
    
                                                                                                 -7
    
    IN RE MINOLTA-QMS, INC.                                                   CONSOLIDATED  "`:.  :;   
    SHAREHOLDERS LITIGATION                                             : CIVIL ACTION NO.  18286:NC;j 
                                                                                                       
    ---------------------~---------------------~-------------------x                           -:  :   
                                                                                               --
                                                                                                       
                                                                                               I.      
                     MENDED  CONSOLIDATED CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT:;;  a5                                
                                                                                                0  i  L
                                                                                                <-I, `1
             Plaintiff William Deckard, by his attorneys, alleges upon information and  b&.ef,  &ept
    
    with respect to  :his ownership of common stock of Minolta-QMS, Inc.  ("QMS" or the
    
    "Company") and his suitability to serve as a class representative, which are alleged upon personal
    
    knowledge, as follows:
    
                                              NATURE OF THE ACTION
    
              1.       Plaintiff brings this action on his own behalf and as a stockholders' class
    
    on behalf of all  o'f the former shareholders of QMS common stock who either tendered their
    
    shares to defendant Minolta Investments Company ("Minolta Investments") for $6.00 per share
    
    in cash or received $6.00 per share in cash in the subsequent short-form merger of QMS into
    
    Minolta Investments (the "Class").
    
             2.        QMS was a publicly-traded Delaware corporation which designed, manufactured,
    
    marketed and supported intelligent controllers which enhance the graphic capabilities and
    
    performance of computer printing and imaging systems. As of September 1, 2000, the Company
    
    was controlled by its majority shareholder Minolta Investments, which owned approximately 57%
    
    of  QMS's outstanding common stock as of that date. Minolta Investments is a wholly-owned
    
    subsidiary of Minolta Co., Ltd. ("Minolta Co."), a Japanese corporation. Minolta Co. formed
    
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • Plaintiff William Deckard, by his attorneys, alleges upon information and b&.ef, &ept
  • Plaintiff brings this action on his own behalf and as a stockholders' class action,
  • on behalf of all o'f the former shareholders of QMS common stock who either tendered their
  • shares to defendant Minolta Investments Company for $6.00 per share
  • in cash or received $6.00 per share in cash in the subsequent short-form merger of QMS into
  • remaining shares of QMS common stock for $6.00 per share in cash.
  • merger which was to follow the tender offer.
  • giving Minolta Investments ownership of approximately
  • short-form merger, extinguishing all public ownership in the Company.
  • The self-dealing transaction described above has injured plaintiff and the other
  • Performance of a discounted cash flow analysis using reasonable discount
  • the Special Committee of QMS's directors resulted in a value of approximately $8.51 per share.
  • minority shareholders for an unfair and grossly inadequate price of $6.00 per share.
  • defendants did not empower QMS's minority shareholders with any
  • Lastly, the "fairness opinion" obtained by the Special Committee from Robinson-Humphrey was
  • marketed and supported intelligent controllers which were designed to enhance the graphic
  • capabilities and performance of computer printing and imaging systems.
  • Defendant Albert A. Butler was at all relevant times Senior Vice
  • Kutani was designated to the QMS Board by Minolta Co. on or about August 10,
  • By reason of the above Individual Defendants' positions with the Company as
  • said individuals were in a fiduciary relationship with plaintiff and the
  • other public stockholders of QMS, and owed plaintiff and the other members of the class the
  • owning approximately 57% of QMS's outstanding common
  • By virtue of Min.olta Investment's position as the Company's majority shareholder,
  • Plaintiff brings this action on his own behalf and as a class action,
  • $6.00 per share in cash in the subsequent short-form merger of QMS into Minolta Investments

  • 3 . COMPLAINT

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    PLAINTIFF
    DEFENDANTS
    QMS
    MEMBERS
    TIMES RELEVENT HERETO
    COMMON
    COMMON STOCK
    DIRECTORS
    CONTROL
    WILLIAM DECKARD
    ADEQUATE
    PUBLIC SHAREHOLDERS
    AFFILIATES
    BREACHING
    STOCKHOLDERS
    COURT
    LAW
    DAMAGES
    PROPOSED TRANSACTION
    CONSUMMATING
    ADJUDICATIONS
    RELIEF
    PRICE
    PROPOSED BUYOUT
    ACTING
    HIROSHI FUJII
    YAMANA
    TIMES RELEVANT HERETO
    COUNSEL
    
                                                                               `-  -.  j'  -           
                                                                                  j  ~  :  : . .  ,-
                    IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE                                  
    
                                       IN AND FOR NEW CASTLE COUNTY
    
    ---------------------------------------------------------------x
    WILLIAM DECKARD,
    
                      Plaintiff,
    
             V.                                                         CA.  N o .  /8@6
    
    EDWA.RD E. LUCENTE; ALBERT A. BUTLER; :
    WILLIAM R. BOWLES; F. RIGDON CURRIE; :                                                   -  ,'
    MICHAEL C. DOW; HIROSHI  FUJII; ALLEN A. :
    HANS:, RYUSHO KUTANI; ROBERT J.                                                                    
    MATERNA; YOSHISUKI TAKEKIDA; SHOE1 :                                                               
    YAMANA; MINOLTA CO. LTD.; MINOLTA :
    INVESTMENTS COMPANY and                                                                            
    MINOILTA-QMS INC.,                                                                     7:  ~  _:
                                                                                           :-         -:
                                                                                                      :
                      Defendants.
    
    
    
                                                       COMPLAINT
    
             Plaintiff, William Deckard, by his attorneys, alleges upon information and belief, except
    
    to paragraph 1 which is alleged upon personal knowledge, as follows:
    
                                                      THE PARTIES
    
             1. Plaintiff William Deckard ("plaintiff `) is the owner of common stock of Minolta-
    
    QMS, Inc. ("QMS" or the `Company") and has been the owner of such shares continuously since
    
    prior to the wrongs complained of herein.
    
             2. Defendant QMS is a Delaware corporation with its principal executive offices located
    
    at One Magnum Pass, Mobile, Alabama. QMS designs, manufactures, markets and supports
    
    intelligent controllers which enhance the graphic capabilities and performance of computer printing
    
    and imaging systems. QMS is and at all times relevant hereto was listed and traded on  theNew  York
    
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • YAMANA; MINOLTA CO.
  • Plaintiff, William Deckard, by his attorneys, alleges upon information and belief, except as
  • Plaintiff William Deckard is the owner of common stock of Minolta-QMS, Inc. and has been the
  • QMS is and at all times relevant hereto was listed and traded on theNew York
  • Defendant Hiroshi Fujii is and at all times relevent hereto has been a director
  • Hans is also Vice President, General Counsel, and Secretary of Minolta
  • Defendants F. Rigdon Currie, Michael C. Dow, William R. Bowles, and Robert J
  • Materna are and at all times relevant hereto have been directors of QMS.
  • stockholders of QMS, and owe plaintiff and the other members of the class the highest
  • The Class is so numerous that joinder of all members is impracticable.
  • There are questions of law and fact which are common to the Class including,
  • plaintiff is an adequate representative ofthe Class and will fairly and adequately protect
  • the risk of inconsistent or varying adjudications with respect to individual members of the
  • Minolta Co. has timed the proposal to freeze out QMS's public shareholders in order
  • to capture for itself QMS's future potential without paying an adequate or fair price to the
  • Minolta timed the announcement of the proposed buyout to place an artificial lid on
  • it affiliates in this proposed transaction, to the detriment of the QMS's public stockholders.
  • control of the Company and control its proxy machinery.
  • Minolta Co., with the acquiescence of the directors of QMS, is engaging in selfdealing and
  • Minolta Co. and the Individual Defendants have breached and are breaching their
  • Unless the proposed buyout is enjoined by the Court,
  • plaintiff prays for judgment and relief as follows:
  • with them, from proceeding with, consummating or closing the proposed transaction;
  • or awarding rescissory damages to the Class;
  •    |