LegalCaseDocs.com
shopping cart  
  |     
Search
 

 
New Visitors


 VeriSign Secure Site

 Get Adobe Reader

RAIZIN v WARNER-LAMBERT Click to find out why . . .



Keywords & Phrases
CaseNo: C.A. No. 17,553, CourtCode: CC, CourtName: IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY IN THE STATE OF DELAWARE, Plaintiff: RAIZIN, State: DE Delaware, UniqueCaseRef: DE>CC>00017553, Wla, Transaction, Individual Defendants, Proposing, Stock, Shareholders, Market, Merger, Ahp, Auction, Stockholders, Wlks, Pfizer, Bid, Agreement, Activemarket, Vink, William, Bidders, Damages, Control, Common Stock, Net Income, Break-up Fee, Inadequate, Negotiate , ContentID: 120240644

Case Documents
1 1999-11 CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 101635
10 pages
PDF
Total Documents: 1 document , 10 pages
Price: $ 19.95


IVESLCD01 KGI0001
 
 

 Forgot your password?


1 . CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
DEFENDANTS
TRANSACTION
INDIVIDUAL DEFENDANTS
PROPOSING
MEMBERS
PLAINTIFFS
STOCK
SHAREHOLDERS
MARKET
MERGER
AHP
AUCTION
STOCKHOLDERS
LAW
WLKS
PFIZER
BID
AGREEMENT
ACTIVEMARKET
VINK
WILLIAM
BIDDERS
DAMAGES
CONTROL
COMMON STOCK
NET INCOME
BREAK-UP FEE
INADEQUATE
NEGOTIATE
                                                                                                   
               IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY IN THE STATE OF DELAWARE

                                IN AND FOR NEW CASTLE COUNTY

--------------------------------------------------------------x
LEONARD H. RAIZIN AND CAROL RAIZIN, :
Co-Trustees of the Raizen Family Trust,

                                             Plaintiffs, :

                 -against  -

WARNER-LAMBERT COMPANY,
ROBERT N. BURT, DONALD C. CLARK,                             :
LODEWIJK J.R. De VINK, JOHN A. GEORGES,:
WILLIAM H. GRAY, III, WILLIAM R.
HOWELL,  LaSALLE  D. LEFFALL, JR.,                           i
GEORGE A. LORCH, ALEX J. MANDL and                           :
MICHAEL I. SOVERN,
                                   Defendants.
--------------------------------------------------------------x


                                    CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

                 Plaintiffs, as and for their Complaint, allege upon information and belief,

except as to themselves, which they allege upon knowledge, as follows:

                                      NATURE OF THE ACTION

                 1.       This is a class action on behalf of the public stockholders of  Warner-

Lambert Company ("WLA" or the "Company") in connection with a proposed stock-for-stock

merger with American Home Products, Inc.  ("AHP") in a transaction which values WLA at

approximately $83 per share. On November 4, 1999, Pfizer, Inc. ("Pfizer"), a third-party

bidder, announced a bid to acquire WLA in stock, which values WLA at $96.40 per share.

Plaintiffs seek to enjoin the proposed AHP/WLA transaction or alternatively to rescind the

transaction and/or recover damages in the event that the transaction is consummated.



                                            PARTIES
SNIPPETS:
  • LODEWIJK J.R. De VINK, JOHN A. GEORGES,:
  • WILLIAM H. GRAY, III, WILLIAM R.
  • This is a class action on behalf of the public stockholders of Warner-Lambert Company ("WLA"
  • bidder, announced a bid to acquire WLA in stock, which values WLA at $96.40 per share.
  • Plaintiffs seek to enjoin the proposed AHP/WLA transaction or alternatively to rescind the
  • transaction and/or recover damages in the event that the transaction is consummated.
  • "Individual Defendants") are each members of WLA's Board of Directors.
  • Individual Defendants have, and at all relevant times had, the power to control and influence,
  • There are in excess of 854 million shares of WLA common stock outstanding
  • c-9 There are questions of law and fact which are common to the
  • Last year, WLKs net income rose to $1.254 billion, or $1.48 per share,
  • that they had entered into a merger agreement.
  • traded stock to AHP stock at an exchange rate of one WLA share for 1.49 19 shares of AHP
  • the deal includes a break-up fee of $2 billion.
  • Pfizer made an unsolicited third-party bid for WLA
  • Defendants should take advantage of the apparent multiple bidders for the Company and the
  • favorable trends of its business cycle, and engage in a value-maximizing auction or
  • The merger agreement with AHP will restrict WLA from seeking
  • WLA shareholders will be receiving an inadequate takeover premium over WLKs
  • market check, the process would have generated several buyers and sufficient buying interest
  • negotiate or continue to negotiate with others, the creation of obstacles to a competitive bid
  • interest in proposing any transaction which would maximize shareholder value,
  •    |