LegalCaseDocs.com
shopping cart  
  |     
Search
 

 
New Visitors


 VeriSign Secure Site

 Get Adobe Reader

ANISFIELD v WINTHROP FINANCIAL ASSOCIATES Click to find out why . . .



Keywords & Phrases
CaseNo: C.A. No. 17,379, CourtCode: CC, CourtName: IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY FOR THE STATE OF DELAWARE, Plaintiff: ANISFIELD, State: DE Delaware, UniqueCaseRef: DE>CC>00017379, County: New Castle County, Partnership, Limited Partners, Winthrop, Preferred Units, Del, Amended Complaint, Zero, General Partner, Nantucket, Rights Offering, Delaware Actions, Offering, Certification, Delaware, Massachusetts Actions, Affiliate, Jacobs Action, Equity, Sale, Partnership Assets, Prospectus, Rights, Class Certification, Nemer Action, Dismiss, Injury, Motion, Allegations, Allege, Pending, Mcwane, First Jacobs Action, Fiduciary Duties, Paragraph, Scheme, Purchase, Nantucket Island, Class Action , ContentID: 120240747

Case Documents
1 2001-07-27 PLAINTIFFS REPLY BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 127138
19 pages
PDF
2 2001-06-20 DEFENDANTS BRIEF IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFFS MOTION FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 115522
28 pages
PDF
3 2001-04-30 PLAINTIFFS OPENING BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 115523
19 pages
PDF
4 2001-04-04 ANSWER OF THREE WINTHROP PROPERTIES WINTHROP FINANCIAL FIRST WINTHROP AND ZERO MAIN
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 115269
12 pages
PDF
5 2001-02-02 DEFENDANTS REPLY BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO DISMISS
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 102750
19 pages
PDF
6 2001-01-11 PLAINTIFFS BRIEF IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS MOTION TO DISMISS
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 102751
22 pages
PDF
7 2000-12-01 DEFENDANTS OPENING BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO DISMISS
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 102752
26 pages
PDF
8 2000-07-24 DEFENDANTS REPLY BRIEF IN SUPPOR TOF MOTIONS TO DISMISS OR STAY
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 102753
12 pages
PDF
9 2000-06-09 DEFENDANTS BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF MOTIONS TO DISMISS OR TO STAY
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 102754
23 pages
PDF
10 2000-04-07 AMENDED CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 101779
30 pages
PDF
11 1999-08-19 CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 101780
22 pages
PDF
Total Documents: 11 documents , 232 pages
Price: $ 69.95


IVESLCD01 KGI0001
 
 

 Forgot your password?


1 . PLAINTIFFS REPLY BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION

EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
COURT
CLASS CERTIFICATION
DEFENDANTS
PARTNERS
COMMON
PLAINTIFFS
FIDUCIARY DUTIES
PROPER
CLASS MEMBERS
HARTNETT
DELAWARE
LIMITED PARTNERS
LEXIS
DERIVATIVE ACTION
OFFERING
GENERAL PARTNER
NOTTINGHAM PARTNERS
FIDUCIARY DUTY
PROPOSED CLASS
PARTNERSHIP
PROSPECTUS
PHILADELPHIA
PENNSYLVANIA
MELLON BANK
AUTHORITIES
OMISSIONS
INVESTORS
DISCLOSURE
MISLEADING
              IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE

                              IN AND FOR NEW CASTLE COUNTY



In re Nantucket Island Associates Limited            CONSOLIDATED
 Partnership Unitholders Litigation                 CIVIL ACTION NO. 17379 NC




                        PLAINTIFFS REPLY BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF                     ._  .
                        THEIR MOTION FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION

                                                                                :  -




                                                                               ! >
OF COUNSEL:                                  Pamela S. Tikellis
                                             Robert J. Kriner, Jr.
Lawrence A. Sucharow                         Beth Deborah Savitz
GOODKIND LABATON RUDOFF                      CHIMICLES  & TIKELLIS LLP
 & SUCHAROW LLP                              One Rodney Square
100 Park Avenue                              P.O. Box 1035
New York, New York 100 17-5563               Wilmington, Delaware 19899
(212) 907-0700                               (302) 656-2500

George W. Croner                             Norman M. Monhait
KOHN SWIFT & GRAF, P.C.                      ROSENTHAL MONHAIT GROSS
One South Broad Street, Suite 2 100          & GODDESS, P.A.
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19 107-33 89      Suite 1401, Mellon Bank Center
(215) 238-1700                               P.O. Box 1070
                                             Wilmington, DE 19899
                                             (302) 656-4433


                                             Attorneys for Plaintiffs

Dated: July 27,200 1



                                                   TABLE OF CONTENTS


                                                                                                   
SNIPPETS:
  • IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
  • Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19 107-33 89 Suite 1401, Mellon Bank Center
  • Certification Is Proper Under Rule 23.
  • Common, Not Individual, Issues Underlie The Claims..
  • This Action is One for Which Class Certification is Appropriate..
  • E. This is Not a Derivative Action..
  • TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
  • The E.F. Hutton Groun, Inc. Del.
  • LEXIS 44, Hartnett, V.C..
  • Gotham Partners, L.P. v. Hallwood Realty Partners, L.P. Del.
  • LEXIS 146,.
  • Nottingham Partners v. Dana Del.

  • 2 . DEFENDANTS BRIEF IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFFS MOTION FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    CERTIFICATION
    COURT
    PREFERRED UNITS
    LITIGATION
    LIMITED PARTNERS
    MEMBERS
    DELAWARE
    PURCHASE PREFERRED UNITS
    PARTNERSHIP
    ALLEGATIONS
    OFFERING
    DEL
    MOTION
    WINTHROP
    INVESTOR LIMITED PARTNERS
    RELIEF
    AMENDED COMPLAINT
    PROSPECTUS
    PROPOSED CLASS
    DEFENDANTS
    OMITTED MATERIAL FACT
    INTERROGATORY
    PURPORTED CLASS
    CLASS TREATMENT
    INVESTMENT
    ADJUDICATIONS
    PRESUMPTION
    OPPOSITION
    FIDUCIARY DUTIES
    
                IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF TH:E STATE OF DELAWARE
                              IN AND FOR N:EW CASTLE COUNTY
    
    
    IN RE NANTUCKET ISLAND ASSOCIATES             ) Consolidated
    LIMITED PARTNERSHIP                 YBUTG OLD ERS     C.A. No. 17379-NC
    LITIGATION
    
    
    
    
    
                             DEFENDANT'S  BRIEF IN OPPOSITION
                      TO PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION
                                                                 -    -      -
    
    
    
    
    
    OF COUNSEL:                                Gregory P. Williams
                                               Raymond J. DiCamillo
    Barbara L. Moore                           Peter B. Ladig
    John J. Tumilty                            Richards, Layton & Fyinger
    Edwards & Angell, LLP                      One Rodney Square
    10 1 Federal Street                        P.O. Box 551
    Boston, Massachusetts 02110                Wilmington, Delaware 19899
    (617) 439-4444                             (302) 658-6541
                                                 Attorneys for Defendants
    
    Dated: June 29,200l
    
    
    
    
    
                                                                             VI :C Wd 62Hfif 10
    
    
    RLFI-2328579-l
    
    
    
                                                TABLE OF CONTENTS
    
    
    TABLEOFAUTHORITIES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
    
    INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF TH:E STATE OF DELAWARE
  • LITIGATION
  • DEFENDANT'S BRIEF IN OPPOSITION
  • TO PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION
  • ALLEGATIONS IN THE AMENDED COMPLAINT.
  • L.P. v. Chandler, Del.

  • 3 . PLAINTIFFS OPENING BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    COURT
    PARTNERSHIP
    LIMITED PARTNERS
    NANTUCKET
    CHANCERY
    DEL
    DEFENDANTS
    LITIGATION
    PREFERRED UNITS
    DELAWARE
    CLASS MEMBERS
    NANTUCKET ISLAND
    CIVIL
    YORK
    GENERAL PARTNER
    REPRESENTATIVES
    FIDUCIARY DUTIES
    SUBSCRIPTION RIGHTS
    LEXIS
    PLAINTIFFS SATISFY
    ML-LEE ACQUISITION FUND
    PARTNERSHIP UNITHOLDERS
    AUTHORITIES
    NUMEROSITY
    CLASS CERTIFICATION
    ACCORDING
    NOTTINGHAM PARTNERS
    PROPOSED CLASS
    PROSPECTUS
    
                  IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
                                  IN AND FOR NEW CASTLE COUNTY                                        
                                                                                                       
    
    
    In re Nantucket Island Associates Limited :       CONSOLIDATED
     Partnership Unitholders Litigation       :       CIVIL ACTION NO. 17379 NC
    
    
    
                             PLAINTIFFS' OPENING BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF
                             THEIR MOTION FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION                               Cl>
    
    
    
    
    
                                                                                  :        )    ="_
    OF COUNSEL:                                       Pamela S. Tikellis                '  I    4
                                                      CHIMICLES  & TIKELLIS LLP
    Lawrence A. Sucharow                              One Rodney Square
    GOODKIND  LA:BATON RUDOFF                         I+. Box 1.035
     & SUCHAROW LLP                                -,r-. Wilmington, Delaware 19899
    100 Park Avenue                                   (302) 656-2500
    New York, New York 10017-5563
    (212) 907-0700
                                                      Norman M. Monhait
    George W. Croner                                  ROSENTHAL MONHAIT GROSS
    KOIIN SWIFT & GRAF, P.C.                          & GODDESS, P.A.
    One South Broad Street, Suite 2 100               Suite 1401, Mellon Bank Center
    Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19107-3389             P.O. Box Ii070
    (215) 238-1700                                    Wilmington, DE 19899
                                                      (302) 656-4433
    
                                                      Attorneys for Plaintiffs
    
    Dated: April 30,200 1
    
    
    
                                                                                                  TABLE
    
    
                                                                                          PAGES
    
    TABLE OF AUTHORITIES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
     . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ii
    
    NATURE AND STAGE OF PROCEEDINGS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • In re Nantucket Island Associates Limited:
  • Partnership Unitholders Litigation: CIVIL ACTION NO. 17379 NC
  • New York, New York 10017-5563
  • TABLE OF AUTHORITIES.
  • PLAINTIFFS SATISFY THE REQUIREMENTS OF .DELAWARE CHANCERY COURT RULE 23.
  • Numerosity.

  • 4 . ANSWER OF THREE WINTHROP PROPERTIES WINTHROP FINANCIAL FIRST WINTHROP AND ZERO MAIN

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    PARAGRAPH
    DENY
    PARTNERSHIP
    SPEAKS
    RESPONSE
    DEFENDANTS ADMIT
    PROSPECTUS
    CHARACTERIZATIONS
    PREFERRED UNITS
    LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
    ZERO
    PLAINTIFFS
    PURCHASE
    PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT
    WINTHROP
    SALE
    SECOND SENTENCES
    OFFERING
    DELAWARE
    PROCEEDS
    DISTRIBUTIONS
    LAW
    DEFENDANTS REPEAT
    INCORPORATE
    REFERENCE
    OVER-SUBSCRIPTION PRIVILEGE
    COURT
    COMPLAINT
    THIRD SENTENCE
    
                                                                                                       
                                                                                                    c-5
                      IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
    
                                   IN AND FOR NEW CASTLE COUNTY
    
    
    IN RE NANTUCKET ISLAND                           >
    ASSOCIATES LIMITED PARTNERSHIP  ) Cons. CA. No. 17379
    UNITHOLDERS LITIGATION                           >
    
    
              ANSWER OF DEFENDANTS THREE WINTHROP PROPERiIE$, INC.,: :`.
                      WINTHROP FINANCIAL ASSOCIATES, FIRST  WINTHhP                              :..s
          CORPORATION AND ZERO MAIN ASSOCIATES LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
    
             Defendants Three Winthrop Properties, Inc. ("Three Winthrop"), Winthrop Financial
    
    Associates,  aLimited Partnership  ("WFA"),  First Winthrop Corporation ("First Winthrop") and Zero
    
    Main Associates Limited Partnership ("Zero Main") (collectively, "Defendants")  hereby answer the
    
    allegations contained in the correspondingly numbered paragraphs of Plaintiff's' Amended Class
    
    Action Complaint as follows:
    
    I.       NATURE OF THE CASE
    
             1.        Defendants admit that Three Winthrop and WFA are general partners of Nantucket
    
    Island Associates Limited Partnership (the "Partnership") and deny all remaining allegations
    
    contained in paragraiph 1,
    
             2.        Defendants admit that in September 1996 an offering of Preferred Units in the
    
    Partnership was conducted pursuant to a Prospectus, which speaks for itself. Defendants deny the
    
    characterizations of the contents of the Prospectus are accurate, and deny all remaining allegations
    
    contained in paragraph 2.
    
             3.        Defendants admit that the Partnership did not make cash distributions to its
    
    Partners in certain years. Defendants deny the remaining allegations contained in paragraph 3,
    
             4.        Denied
    
    
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
  • ANSWER OF DEFENDANTS THREE WINTHROP PROPERiIE$, INC.,::`.
  • CORPORATION AND ZERO MAIN ASSOCIATES LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
  • Associates, aLimited Partnership, First Winthrop Corporation and Zero
  • Island Associates Limited Partnership and deny all remaining allegations
  • Partnership was conducted pursuant to a Prospectus, which speaks for itself.
  • characterizations of the contents of the Prospectus are accurate,
  • Defendants deny the remaining allegations contained in paragraph 3,
  • Units and that 134 Preferred Units were purch.ased by unaffrhated Limited Partners.
  • Defendants admit that most of the proceeds from the 1998 sale of certain Partnership
  • June 1998 correspondence to investors in the Partnership describing the sale of Partnership
  • contents contained in the third sentence of paragraph 8.
  • sentence of paragraph 16 is a description of the action to which no response is required.
  • Partnership Agreement ofthe Partnership is a document which speaks
  • The allegations contained in paragraph 23 set -forth conclusions of law to which no
  • Defendants lack knowledge sufficient to form a belief as to,what the plaintiffs mean
  • THE OFFERING AND WINTHROP'S SCHEME TO DISSUA.DE UNAFFILIATED LIMITED PARTNERS FROM PURCHASING
  • by the allegations contained in the first and second sentences of paragraph 35 and on that
  • Defendants admit that in certain years the Partnership did not make cash distributions to its
  • THE OVER-SUBSCRIPTION PRIVILEGE: THE SHIFT OF PARTNERSHIP
  • which speaks for itself and admit that Zero Main acted as guarantor for the purchase of all
  • Defendants repeat and incorporate herein by reference their responses to the
  • The Amended Complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.

  • 5 . DEFENDANTS REPLY BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO DISMISS

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    AMENDED COMPLAINT
    PARTNERSHIP ASSETS
    PLAINTIFFS
    COURT
    COMPLAINT STATES
    LIMITED PARTNERS
    DEFENDANTS
    DEL
    OFFERING
    WINTHROP
    PREFERRED UNITS
    DELAWARE
    OPPOSITION
    GENERAL PARTNER
    EMPHASIS
    ALLEGATIONS
    VOTING RIGHTS
    UNJUST ENRICHMENT
    LEGITIMATE PURPOSE
    COUNSEL
    AUTHORITIES
    USURPATION
    PREFERRED UNITHOLDERS
    JOIN INDISPENSABLE PARTIES
    SUBSTANTIAL PORTION
    PARTNERSHIP PROPERTIES
    CONNECTION
    PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT
    INDISPENSABLE PARTY
    
                IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
    
                           IN AND FOR NEW CASTLE COUNTY
    
    
    
    IN RE NANTUCKET ISLAND               >
    ASSOCIATES LIMITED PARTNERSHIP  ) CONS. C.A. NO. 17379
    UNITHOLDERS LITIGATION               1
    
    
    
    
    
                              DEFENDANTS' REPLY BRIEF
                       IN SUPPORT OF THEIR MOTION TO DISMISS                -      :
                                                                            . I
    
    
    
    OF COUNSEL:
    
    Barbara L. Moore                          Gregory P. Williams
    John J. Tumilty                           Raymond J. DiCamillo
    Edwards & Angell, LLP                     Richards, Layton & Finger
    101 Federal Street                        One Rodney Square
    Boston, Massachusetts 02110               P.O. Box 55 1
    (617) 439-4444                            Wilmington, Delaware 19899
                                              (302) 658-6541
                                               Attorneys for Defendants
    
    
    
    
    Dated: February 2,200l
    
    
    
    
    RLFl-2263997.1
    
    
    
                                             TABLE OF CONTENTS
    
    
    TABLE OF AUTHORITIES . . . . . . ii
    
    ~ T R O D U C T I O N . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
  • OF COUNSEL:
  • TABLE OF AUTHORITIES.
  • OF THEIR CLAIMS, THE AMENDED COMPLAINT STATES
  • Partnership Assets,
  • PLAINTIFFS' CLAIMS MUST BE DISMISSED BECAUSE PLAINTIFFS FAILED TO JOIN INDISPENSABLE PARTIES.
  • PLAINTIFFS' HAVE FAILED TO STATE A CLAIM FOR UNJUST ENRICHMENT AND, ACCORDINGLY, SUCH
  • In re Cencom Cable Income Partners, Del.
  • Defendants Three Winthrop, WFA, First Winthrop and Zero Main
  • Dismiss and in response to Plaintiffs' Brief in Opposition to Defendants' Motion to
  • This portrayal of their claims is belied, however, by the actual allegations of
  • usurpation of Partnership assets.
  • Limited Partners derivatively.
  • DESPITE PLAINTIFFS' ATTEMPTED RECHARACTERIZATION OF THEIR CLAIMS, THE AMENDED COMPLAINT

  • 6 . PLAINTIFFS BRIEF IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS MOTION TO DISMISS

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    LIMITED PARTNERS
    DEFENDANTS
    PREFERRED UNITS
    AMENDED COMPLAINT
    RIGHTS
    COURT
    PURCHASE
    PARTNERSHIP
    BREACH
    PLAINTIFFS JACOBS
    DEL
    WINTHROP
    OFFERING
    AMENDED COMPLAINT PLEADS
    SUBSCRIPTION RIGHTS
    GENERAL PARTNER
    PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT
    ALLEGATIONS
    SHAREHOLDERS
    ECONOMICALLY PRODUCTIVE ASSETS
    PROSPECTUS
    MANIPULATION
    TRANSACTION
    LITIQATION
    MATERIAL FACTS
    COUNSEL
    AUTHORITIES
    PURCHASERS
    MASSACHUSETTS SUPERIOR COURT
    
                   IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
                               IN AND FOR NEW CASTLE COUNTY
    
    
    
    
    IN RE NANTUCKET ISLAND ASSOCIATES             :             CONSOLIDATED
    LIMITED PARTNERSHIP UNITHOLDERS               :     CIVIL ACTION NO.  Ll79cNC  ._  .VFR"
                                                                                        I  -
    LITIGATION                                                                 --.                4  J+
                                                                               2,  c
                                                                               zrf        5     .-  *us,
                                                                               b-f-b: --         
                                                                               .-,A~.  I
                                                                               "
                                                                               y<
                                                                               I': _
                                                                               x :i       z       ---`:I
                                                                               -il ~.x
                                                                               v) c.; 43         -raY+
                                          PLAINTIFFS' BRIEF                    ;r;r;,  tv       `I ,J
                       1N OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO  DISMi%                     GJ
    
    
    
    OF COUNSEL:
    
    Lawrence A. Sucharow                                 Norman  M. Monhait
    GOODKIND LABATON RUDOFF                              ROSENTHAL  MONHAIT GROSS
     8 SUCHAROW LLP                                            & GODDESS, P.A.
    100 Park Avenue                                      Suite 1401, Mellon Bank Center
    New York, New York  10017-5563                       P.O. Box 1070
    (212) 907-0700                                      Wilmington, Delaware 19899
                                                         (302) 656-4433
    George W. Croner
    KOHN SWIFT 8 GRAF, P.C.                              Pamela S. Tikellis
    One South Broad Street, Suite 2100                   CHIMICLES & TIKELLIS LLP
    Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19107-3389               One Rodney Square
    (215) 238-1700                                       P.O. Box 1035
                                                        Wilmington, DE 19899
                                                         (302) 656-2500
    
                                   Attorneys for Plaintiffs
    
    
    January  `I  1, 2001
    
    
    
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
  • OF COUNSEL:
  • TABLE OF AUTHORITIES.
  • THE AMENDED COMPLAINT PLEADS DIRECT CLAIMS PROPERLY
  • PURSUED BY PLAINTIFFS FOR THEMSELVES AND THE PROPOSED
  • Their Contractual Right To Purchase the Preferred Units.
  • Claims Predicated On The Breach Of Individual
  • Contractual Rights Are Direct, Not Derivative.
  • Avacus Partners, L.P. v. Brian, Del.
  • In Re Cencom Cable Income Partners, L.P., Litiqation, Del.
  • In Re Gaylord Container Corp. Shareholders Litiaation,
  • Plaintiffs' submit this brief in opposition to Defendants" Motion to Dismiss.
  • Three Winthrop, Properties, inc., et al., No. 17379-NC and Jacobs v. Winthrop
  • Re Nantucket Island Associates Limited Partnership Unitholders Litiqation,
  • "Partnership") so that Winthrop, the general partner, and its affiliates, rather than
  • Plaintiffs and their fellow Limited Partners,
  • Plaintiffs and their fellow Limited Partners under the terms of a 1996 offering
  • the General Partner2 of Nantucket distributed a prospectus
  • the Limited Partners individual "Subscription Rights" granting each Limited Partner the
  • any capital transaction equal to 2.5 times the preferred invested capital.
  • material facts from, the Prospectus for the purpose of discouraging the Limited
  • Defendants had sold all of Nantucket's economically productive assets.
  • THE AMENDED COMPLAINT PLEADS DIRECT CLAIMS PROPERLY PURSUED BY PLAINTIFFS FOR THEMSELVES AND
  • While Winthrop's brief cites liberally from those allegations in the Amended
  • Amended Complaint and its claims lies in Winthrop's manipulation of the Offering.
  • Section 4.3B of Nantucket's Partnership Agreement requires that additional
  • THE CLAIMS OF PLAINTIFFS JACOBS AND OURISMAN ARE NOT BARRED BY RES JUDICATA
  • IT IS NOT NECESSARY TO NAME ALL LIMITED PARTNER PURCHASERS OF PREFERRED UNITS AS DEFENDANTS
  • Winthrop refused to correct this error by stipulation, but the Massachusetts Superior Court

  • 7 . DEFENDANTS OPENING BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO DISMISS

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    PARTNERSHIP
    WINTHROP
    COURT
    INJURY
    ALLEGE
    SALE
    DELAWARE
    JACOBS
    ENRICHMENT
    LIMITED PARTNERS
    DEL
    ZERO
    STANDING
    PREFERRED UNITS
    OFFERING
    AMENDED COMPLAINT
    PARTNERSHIP ASSETS
    MASSACHUSETTS
    GENERAL PARTNERS
    DELAWARE LAW
    ALLEGATIONS
    FIDUCIARY DUTY
    UNIFORM LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
    LIMITED PARTNERSHIP ACT
    DEFENDANTS
    BRACEGIRDLE
    UNJUST ENRICHMENT
    PURCHASE PREFERRED UNITS
    RICHARD ANISFIELD
    
                       IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
                                       IN AND FOR NEW CASTLE COUNTY
    
     RICHARD ANISFIELD, individually and
     on behalf of all others similarly situated,
                                                               1
                                  Plaintiff.                   11
                V.                                             ) C.A. No.  17379-NC        t/
    
     THREE WINTHROP PROPERTIES, INC.,
     and ZERO MAIN ASSOCIATES LIMITED )
     PARTNERSHIP,                                              1)
                                  Defendants.                  )
     _______l~__L___________________________-~---~---------    )
     LEWIS JACOBS and ROBERT B.
      OIJRISMAN, on behalf of themselves and
     all others similarly situated,                            1
                                  Plaintiffs,                  i
                \`.                                            ) C.A. No.  17602-NC
    
      WINTHROP FINANCIAL ASSOCIATES,                           1
      THREE WINTHROP PROPERTIES, INC.                          )
     and FIRST WINTHROP CORPORATION                            11
                                  Defendants.                  1
    
                                       DEFENDANTS' OPENING BRIEF IN
                                 SUPPORT OF THEIR MOTION TO DlSMlSS
    
    OF COIJNSEL
    
    Barbara L Moore                                                      Gregory P. Williams
    John J  Tumilty                                                      Raymond J. DiCamillo
    Edwards  & Angel], LLP                                               Richards, Layton & Finger
    101 Federal Street                                                   P.O. Box 551
    Boston, Massachusetts 021  lo- 1800                                  Wilmington, Delaware 19899
    (6'17) 439-4444                                                      (302) 658-6541
                                                                           Attorneys for Defendants
    Dated. December 1, 2000
    
    
    RL.Fl-2237355-l
    
    
    
                                                      TABLE OF CONTENTS
    
    
    T       A           B    L    E         O    F            A    U     T       H    O    R       I   
    
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • and ZERO MAIN ASSOCIATES LIMITED)
  • The 1998 Sale Should Be Dismissed Because They State A Derivative
  • Dismissed As They Fail To Allege A Direct Injury As Required By
  • ALLEGED BY PLAINTIFFS BECAUSE PLAINTIFFS HAVE FAILED TO COMPLY
  • WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF SECTlON 17-1003 OF THE DELAWARE
  • REViiSED UNIFORM LIMITED PARTNERSHIP ACT AND COURT OF CHANCERY
  • I THEREBY DEPRIVING PLAINTIFFS OF STANDING TO BRING SUCH
  • 1,' ALL CLAIMS OF PLAINTI.FFS JACOBS AND OURISMAN ARE BARRED
  • Del Ch., 106 A.2d 202.
  • Defendants Three Winthrop Properties, Inc.
  • partnership assets as more fully described below The 1996 Offering was made to all of the then
  • August 27, 1999, limited partner Richard Anisfield commenced his action in this
  • Plaintiffs purport to represent a class consisting of limited partners in the Partnership "who
  • of Preferred Units pursuant to the 1996 Offering.
  • in federal court in Massachusetts, om or about June 25, 1999, which also was based on the 1996
  • Offering [Bracegirdle AfE, Ex.
  • Defendants are the general partners of the Partnership and entities alleged to be the general
  • `Winthrop reserves its right to dispute the correctness of any allegation of fact or law
  • seven limited partners who did not purchase Preferred Units initiated four
  • it is clear from these allegations of the Amended Complaint that the claims which Plaintiffs
  • Plaintif% Fiduciary Duty Allegations Related To The 1996 Offering And The
  • Dismissed As Thev Cannot Be Brought lndividuallv Under Delaware Law.
  • PLAINTIFFS HAVE FALLED TO STATE A CLAIM FOR UNJUST ENRICHMENT AN[), ACCORDINGLY, SUCH CAEE OF

  • 8 . DEFENDANTS REPLY BRIEF IN SUPPOR TOF MOTIONS TO DISMISS OR STAY

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    PLAINTIFFS
    MASSACHUSETTS
    WINTHROP
    DELAWARE ACTIONS
    CERTIFICATION
    DISMISS
    NEMER ACTION
    JACOBS ACTION
    OPPOSITION
    MOTIONS
    COUNSEL
    CONFERENCE
    DEFENDANTS
    PURPORTING
    DEL
    REQUEST
    OPENING
    FACTS
    PENDING
    MEMBERS
    MCWANE
    PROPER
    INTENDS
    SLIP
    COMPLAINT
    SUPPORT
    SCHNELL
    HARTNETT
    OPPOSE CLASS CERTIFICATION
    
                      IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
                                      IN AND FOR NEW CASTLE COUNTY
    
    RICHARD ANISFIELD, individually and on
    behalf of all others similarly situated,
    
                                       Plaintiff,                 i
    
                                                                          C.A. No.  17379-NC   r/
                              V.                                  i                             ,'
    
    THREE WINTHROP PROPERTIES,  lNC.,                             i
    and ZERO MAIN ASSOCIATES LIMITED
    PARTNERSHIP,                                                  ;
    
                                       Defendants.                1
    
    -----_-----_-----_-------------------------"---~------------- ;
    LEWIS JACOBS and ROBERT B.                                                                        _.
    OURISMAN, on behalf of themselves and                         ;
    all others similarly situated,                                                                    .
                                                                  t
                                       Plaintiffs,                                                   
                                                                  ;                                   .
                              V.                                          CA. No.  17602~NC           c
                                                                                          -.         
                                                                  i
    WINTHROP FINANCIAL ASSOCIATES,
    THREE WINTHROP PROPERTIES, INC.                               1
    and FIRST WINTHROP CORPORATION,
                                                                  ;
                                       Defendants,
    
    
                       DEFENDANTS REPLY BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF MOTIONS
                                           TO DISMISS OR TO STAY
    
    OF COUNSEL:
    
    Barbara L. Moore                                     Gregory P. Williams
    John J. Tumilty                                      Raymond J. DiCarnillo
    Edwards & Angell, LLP                                Richards, Layton & Finger
    101 Federal Street                                   One Rodney Square
    Boston, Massachusetts 02 1 lo- 1800                  P. 0. Box 551
    (617) 439-4444                                       Wilmington, Delaware 19899
                                                         (302) 658-6541
                                                          Attorneys for Defendants
    Dated: July 24, 2000
    
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • WINTHROP FINANCIAL ASSOCIATES,
  • DEFENDANTS REPLY BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF MOTIONS
  • OF COUNSEL:
  • PURPORTING TO REPRESENT A CLASS WHICH INCLUDES
  • THE MEMBERS OF THE CLASS WHICH PLAINTIFFS IN THE
  • DELAWARE ACTIONS ARE PURPORTING TO REPRESENT.
  • McWane Cast Iron Pipe Corp. v. McDowell-Wellman En& Co.,
  • Steuak v. Columbia Pictures Entertainment, Inc., Del.
  • In Winthrop's Brief in Support of Motions to Dismiss or to Stay ("Winthrop's
  • Opening Brief') tiled on June 9,2000, Winthrop set forth its arguments as to why this Court
  • during a telephonic status conference held on April 28, 2000, Winthrop informed the Court
  • that it intended to oppose class certification in the Nemer Action,
  • in response to an additional request from
  • In Plaintiffs' Brief in Opposition to Defendants' Motion to Dismiss or to Stay
  • Capitalized terms used herein shall have the same definition as in Winthrop's Opening
  • staying the Delaware Actions in favor of the prior-tiled Massachusetts Actions.
  • TO REPRESENT A CLASS WHICH INCLUDES THE MEMBERS OF THE CLASS WHICH PLAINTIFFS IN THE DELAWARE
  • arising from the same set of operative facts, pending against it in two different
  • See Schnell v. Porta Svs.
  • No. 12948, slip op.
  • at 11, Hartnett, V.C. ' (staying second-filed uncertified Delaware class action
  • the Amended Complaint in the Nemer Action indicates that the Nemer
  • Massachusetts Court stated that it intends to include a briefing schedule for class
  • Second Jacobs Action was tiled on or about November 22,
  • Dismissing or staying the First Jacobs Action is entirely proper under McWane and

  • 9 . DEFENDANTS BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF MOTIONS TO DISMISS OR TO STAY

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    DELAWARE ACTIONS
    MASSACHUSETTS ACTIONS
    WINTHROP
    JACOBS ACTION
    NEMER ACTION
    FIRST JACOBS ACTION
    PENDING
    DISMISS
    MCWANE
    DEFENDANTS
    MOTION
    AMENDED COMPLAINT
    DEL
    SECOND JACOBS ACTION
    PLAINTIFFS
    PARTNERSHIP
    CLASS ACTIONS
    PREFERRED UNITS
    LIMITED PARTNERS
    FIRST WINTHROP CORPORATION
    PROCEDURAL HISTORY
    ACTIONS PURPORT
    FEDERAL COURT
    LEWIS JACOBS
    FIDUCIARY DUTY
    SECURITIES
    PURPORTED CLASS
    AUTHORITIES
    ALLEGATIONS
    
                                                                                        ,     r     /
    
                       IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
                                      IN AND FOR NEW CASTLE COUNTY
    
    RICHARD ANISFIELD, individually and on
    behalf of all others similarly situated,                      i
    
    
    
                              V.
    
    
    THREE WINTHROP PROPERTIES, INC.,
    and ZERO MAIN ASSOCIATES LIMITED
    PARTNERSHIP,                                                  ;
    
                                       Defendants.                i)
    __-__-___-__-_---_---------------------------------------------- >
    LEWIS JACOBS and ROBERT B.
    OURISMAN, on behalf of themselves and                         ;
    all others similarly situated,
                                                                   i
                                        F'laintiffs,
                                                                   i
                               V.
    
                                                                   ;
    WINTHROP FINANCIAL ASSOCIATES,
    THREE WINTHROP PROPE'RTIES,  INC.                              i
    and FIRST WINTHROP CORPORATION,
                                                                   i
                                        Defendants.
    
    
                           DEFENDANTS' BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF MOTIONS
                                             TO DISMISS OR TO STAY
    
    OF COUNSEL:
    
    John J. Tumilty                                       Gregory P. Williams
    Edwards & Angell, LLP                                 Raymond J. DiCamillo
     101 Federal Street                                   Richards, Layton & Finger
    Boston, Massachusetts 02 1 lo- 1800                   One Rodney Square
    (617) 439-4444                                        P. 0. Box 551
                                                          Wilmington, Delaware 19899
                                                          (302) 658-6541
                                                            Attorneys for Defendants
    Dated: June 9, 2000
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
  • WINTHROP FINANCIAL ASSOCIATES,
  • DEFENDANTS' BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF MOTIONS
  • Background And Allegations In The Amended Complaint 2
  • The First Jacobs Action
  • THIS COURT SHOULD DISMISS OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, STAY THE DELAWARE ACTIONS IN FAVOR OF THE
  • Adirondack GP Inc. v. American Power Corp., Del.
  • et al. v. Winthron Securities Co.,
  • No. 98-5536C [the "Nemer Action"]
  • Associates, First Winthrop Corporation, and Zero Main
  • series of four pending purported class actions.
  • `Although no motion to consolidate the two actions shown on the caption above was ever filed,
  • partners inNantucket Island Associates Limited Partnership.
  • Offering, the Partnership sought to raise funds by selling Preferred Units at $13,333.00 per
  • Plaintiffs and the purported class members did not purchase
  • Preferred Units after those units had first been offered to limited partners in the
  • The four purported class actions currently pending listed in the order in which they
  • filed a motion to dismiss thLe Nemer Action, except for the breach of fiduciary duty claim.
  • The second action is entitled Lewis Jacobs, et al. v. Winthrov Financial Associates,
  • The First Jacobs Action was filed
  • Action and the Second Jacobs Action purports to allege claims against
  • Procedural History And Nature Of The Delaware Actions
  • same facts and the federal court could exercise pendent jurisdiction over the state claims
  • Actions and the Delaware Actions purport to assert claims arising out of the 1996 Offering.
  • For all the foregoing reasons and on the authorities cited,

  • 10 . AMENDED CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    PARTNERSHIP
    WINTHROP
    GENERAL PARTNER
    ZERO
    PLAINTIFFS
    PREFERRED UNITS
    NANTUCKET
    DEFENDANTS
    OFFERING
    EQUITY
    CLASS ACTION
    AFFILIATE
    SCHEME
    PROSPECTUS
    ASSETS
    NANTUCKET ISLAND
    PARAGRAPHS
    MORTGAGE LOAN
    CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS
    INVESTMENT
    CASH DISTRIBUTIONS
    PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT
    FIRST WINTHROP
    AMENDED CLASS ACTION
    BOAT BASIN
    HARBOR HOUSE HOTEL
    RICHARD ANISFIELD
    OPERATING INCOME
    FIDUCIARY DUTIES
    
              IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY FOR THE STATE OF DELAWARE                            iz-
    
                                IN AND FOR NEW CASTLE COUNTY
    
    
    
    RICHARD ANISFIELD, on behalf of himself :
    and all others similarly situated,
    
                           Plaintiff,
                                                           Civil Action No. 17379-NC J
                  V.
    
    WINTHROP FINANCIAL ASSOCIATES,
    THREE WINTHROP PROPERTIES, INC.,
    and ZERO MAIN ASSOCIATES LIMITED
    PARTNERSHIP,
    
                           Defendants.                                           I
    
    
    LEWIS JACOBS and ROBERT B. OURISMAN  I                                            `.
    on behalf of themselves and all others
    similarly situated,
    
                                    Plaintiffs,
    V.                                                     Civil Action No. 17602-NC
    
    WINTHROP FINANCIAL ASSOCIATES,                  :
    THREE WINTHROP PROPERTIES, INC. :
    and FIRST WINTHROP CORPORATION, :
    
                                    Defendants. :
                                                   X
    
    
                              AMENDED CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
    
           Plaintiffs Richard Anisfield, Lewis Jacobs and Robert B. Ourisman, individually and
    
    on behalf of all others similarly situated, allege on information and belief, except for
    
    paragraphs 11, 12 and 13, below:
    
    
    
                                    I. NATURE OF THE CASE
    
           1. This action arises out of a scheme orchestrated by defendants Three
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • RICHARD ANISFIELD, on behalf of himself:
  • WINTHROP FINANCIAL ASSOCIATES, THREE WINTHROP PROPERTIES, INC.,
  • AMENDED CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
  • This action arises out of a scheme orchestrated by defendants Three
  • , the general partners of Nantucket Island
  • Associates Limited Partnership,
  • positions and usurp the equity interests of Nantucket's limited partners
  • for the benefit of the General Partners' affiliate, Zero Main Associates Limited Partnership
  • Using an unfair and deceptive rights offering,
  • Preferred Units were, in effect, fully secured by Partnership assets, the Preferred Units
  • paid cash distributions to Limited Partners since at least 1993.
  • that, even with the very favorable terms of the Preferred Units, it was unlikely that the
  • investment had little or no value, would make any further direct monetary
  • the prospectus accompanying the Offering was written to
  • increasing Nantucket's operating income, reducing its debt payments, and increasing the
  • Offering which constitute gross breaches of the fiduciary duties owed by Winthrop to the
  • a general partner of the Partnership, and is a wholly-owned subsidiary of First Winthrop
  • the Nantucket Boat Basin (including the Hy-Line Ferry
  • $80,000.00 per unit, Winthrop provided Plaintiffs, and other prospective investors in the
  • Partners that would alter the basic substance of the Partnership Agreement;
  • the Mortgage Loan to mature in April 1994.
  • "the General Partner believes that the capital improvements intended
  • Properties had a combined value of only $30.6 million; and the Harbor House Hotel and
  • Plaintiffs repeat and reallege paragraphs 1 through 66.
  • foregoing Amended Class Action Complaint to be served by hand on April 7,

  • 11 . CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    PARTNERSHIP
    RIGHTS OFFERING
    WINTHROP
    ZERO
    NANTUCKET
    AFFILIATE
    GENERAL PARTNER
    PREFERRED UNITS
    EQUITY
    SALE
    SUBSTANTIAL PORTION
    PLAINTIFF
    MISLEADING
    SCHEME
    PROSPECTUS
    NANTUCKET ISLAND
    CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS
    INVESTMENT
    FIDUCIARY DUTIES
    BOAT BASIN
    LEGITIMATE PURPOSE
    OPERATING INCOME
    FINANCING ALTERNATIVES
    PURCHASING
    UNSOLD PREFERRED UNITS
    NET OPERATING INCOME
    FALSE IMPRESSION
    RICHARD ANISFLELD
    THEREAFTER
    
                 IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
                                  IN AND FOR NEW CASTLE COUNTY
    
    c++++++s++++++++++++++++++++   x
    
    RICHARD ANISFlELD,  individually and on behalf of all :
    others similarly situated,
    
    
    
    
    
    THREE WINTHROP PROPERTIES, INC., and
    ZERO MAIN ASSOCIATES LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, ;
    
                                   Defendants.
    
    
    
    
    
    +++++++++++++++++++++++++f++   x
    
                                    CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
    
                    Plaintiff alleges on information and belief, except as to paragraph 14 below which
    
    is alleged on knowledge, as follows:
    
                                        NATURE OF THE CASE
    
                    1. This  .action arises out of a scheme orchestrated by defendant Three
    
    Winthrop Properties Inc. ("Winthrop" or the "General Partner "), the General Partner of
    
    Nantucket Island Associates Limited Partnership ("Nantucket" or the "Partnership"), to usurp the
    
    equity interests of Nantucket's limited partners to benefit its affiliate, Zero Main Associates
    
    Limited Partnership ("Zero Main"). Using an unfair and misleading rights offering, Winthrop
    
    caused a substantial majority of limited partners' equity to be diverted to its affiliate.
    
    with the equity interests of Nantucket concentrated with its affiliate, Winthrop caused a sale of a
    
    
    
    substantial portion of Nantucket's assets, funneling the bulk of the proceeds to its affiliate, Zero
    
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • RICHARD ANISFlELD, individually and on behalf of all:
  • ZERO MAIN ASSOCIATES LIMITED PARTNERSHIP,;
  • Plaintiff alleges on information and belief, except as to paragraph 14 below which
  • This .action arises out of a scheme orchestrated by defendant Three
  • Winthrop Properties Inc. ("Winthrop" or the "General Partner "),
  • Nantucket Island Associates Limited Partnership,
  • equity interests of Nantucket's limited partners to benefit its affiliate,
  • Using an unfair and misleading rights offering,
  • substantial portion of Nantucket's assets, funneling the bulk of the proceeds to its
  • The improper rights offering, and subsequent sale of the partnership properties, had no
  • the fact that the investments in the Preferred Units were, in effect, fully secured by
  • Partner that their initial investment had little or no value, would make any
  • prospectus accompanying the Rights Offering was written with an intent to
  • on increasing Nantucket's operating income, reducing its debt payments, and increasing the
  • Zero Main, an affiliate of Winthrop, offered to purchase all unsold Preferred Units in the
  • Offerings which constitute gross breaches of the fiduciary duties owed by Winthrop to the
  • Boat Basin and the employee housing for approximately 150 persons.
  • Unaffiliated Limited Partners from Purchasing Units
  • to make capital improvements to the Properties totaling approximately $4.5
  • Partnership's net operating income, reducing its debt payments and increasing the
  • In order to create the false impression that the sale of Nantucket's
  • Offering could not have served any legitimate purpose.
  • (4 It failed to pursue financing alternatives which were obviously less
  • dissuading such limited partners from purchasing Preferred Units, and thereafter failing to
  •    |