LegalCaseDocs.com
shopping cart  
  |     
Search
 

 
New Visitors


 VeriSign Secure Site

 Get Adobe Reader

IMC GLOBAL v MOFFETT Click to find out why . . .



Keywords & Phrases
CaseNo: C.A. No. 16,387, CourtCode: CC, CourtName: IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE, Plaintiff: IMC GLOBAL, State: DE Delaware, UniqueCaseRef: DE>CC>00016387, Igl, Ftx, Kissinger, Moffett, Plp, Moxy, Frp, Transactions, Delaware, Motions, Partnership, Del, Complaint, Gas, Dismiss, Directors, Standing, Participation Agreement, Merger, Oil, Bangor Punta, Adkerson, Participation, Limited Partnership, Allegations, Rescission, Paragraph, Rankin, Assets, Fiduciary Duties, Party, Equity, Special Committee, Wrongdoing, Frp-moxy Transactions, Agreement, Davis Polk, Opposition, Denies, Amended Complaint, General Partner, Unitholders, Shareholder, Transaction , ContentID: 120240966

Case Documents
1 1999-08-10 DEFENDANT MCMORAN OIL & GAS COS REPLY BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF ITS MOTION TO DISMISS
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 103153
24 pages
PDF
2 1999-08-10 REPLY MEMORANDUM OF LAW OF DEFENDANT DR. H. KISSINGER IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 103152
16 pages
PDF
3 1999-05-19 PLAINTIFFS MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO DISMISS
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 103154
31 pages
PDF
4 1999-04-13 FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 102147
39 pages
PDF
5 1999-03-31 BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO DISMISS
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 103155
21 pages
PDF
6 1998-07-01 ANSWER OF DEFENDANT MCMORAN OIL & GAS
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 102148
11 pages
PDF
Total Documents: 6 documents , 142 pages
Price: $ 44.95


IVESLCD01 KGI0001
 
 

 Forgot your password?


1 . DEFENDANT MCMORAN OIL & GAS COS REPLY BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF ITS MOTION TO DISMISS

EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
PLAINTIFFS
PLP
FTX
COURT
DELAWARE
PARTICIPATION
DEFENDANTS
DEL
PARTY
STANDING
CASTLE
ACTS
AGREEMENT
TRANSACTION
DISMISS
EQUITY
BANGOR PUNTA
EQUITABLE RESCISSION
COMPLAINT
DELAWARE LAW
LLC
IGL MEMORANDUM
CHANCERY
DEFENDANT MCMORAN OIL
WRONGFUL
LACKS STANDING
MIDLAND FOOD SERVICES
CASTLE HILL HOLDINGS
MOXY
          IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE

                            IN AND FOR NEW CASTLE COUNTY

IMC GLOBAL, INC. and PHOSPHATE            )
RESOURCE PARTNERS LIMITED                 >
PARTNERSHIP,                              >>
             Plaintiffs and Counterclaim  )
             Defendants,                  >>    C.A. No.  16387-NC
             V .                          1
                                          )
JAMES R. MOFFETT, RICHARD C. )
ADKERSON, B.M.  RANKIN and                )
HENRY A. KISSINGER                        >>
             Defendants and               >
             Counterclaim Plaintiffs,  )
                                          >
             and                          >>
MCMORAN OIL  & GAS CO.,                   >1
             Defendant.                   >

                     DEFENDANT MCMORAN OIL  & GAS  CO.`S
              REPLY BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF ITS MOTION TO DISMISS



                                          MORRIS, JAMES,  HITCHENS  & WILLIAMS
                                          Henry N.  Hemdon, Jr.
                                          Lewis H. Lazarus
                                          James E. Dmec
                                          222 Delaware Avenue, 10th Floor
                                          P.O. Box 2306
                                          Wilmington, Delaware 19899
                                          (302) 888-6800
                                          Attorneys for Defendant McMoRan Oil & Gas Co.

August 10, 1999



                                   TABLE OF CONTENTS

                                                                                                  

TABLE OF AUTHORITIES . . . .  h . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ii.

PRELIMINARYSTATEMENT  .ee  ~........~*~.~......~ .  ...=.... 1

ARGUMENT:
SNIPPETS:
  • IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
  • Plaintiffs and Counterclaim)
  • DEFENDANT MCMORAN OIL & GAS CO.`S
  • REPLY BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF ITS MOTION TO DISMISS
  • A PARTY PARTICIPATING IN THE: WRONGFUL ACTS COMPLAINED OF HAS NO STANDING IN
  • HAVING ACQUIRED ITS INTEREST IN PLP FROM FTX, IGL LACKS STANDING TO MAINTAIN THE ACTION AND
  • PLAINTIFFS' CLAIM FOR EQUITABLE RESCISSION
  • Arnold v. Societv for Savings Bancorp, Inc., Del.
  • Bangor Punta Operations.
  • Midland Food Services V, LLC v. Castle Hill Holdings V, LLC, Del.
  • Delaware Law Of Corporations &
  • Pomeroy, Equity JurisDrudence, 6 1377.
  • Wolfe & Pittenger, CorPorate and Commercial Practice in the Delaware Court of Chancerv, 8

  • 2 . REPLY MEMORANDUM OF LAW OF DEFENDANT DR. H. KISSINGER IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    CONTROLLING
    IGL
    WRONGDOING
    DEFENDANTS
    BANGOR
    PUNTA
    PARTNER
    DIRECTORS
    DEL
    PLP
    PLAINTIFF
    SUIT
    DOCTRINE
    COURT
    GENERAL PARTNER
    ASSERT
    COUNTERCLAIM
    FTX
    RECOVER
    SUPRA
    COURTLAND
    SOUTH BETHANV
    TRANSACTION
    PURCHASE
    REASONS
    BASIS
    FIDUCIARY DUTY
    DISABILITY
    PRIMARY WRONGDOERS
    
                 IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
    
                              IN AND FOR NEW CASTLE COUNTY
    
    
    IMC GLOBAL INC. and PHOSPHATE             >
    RESOURCE PARTNERS LIMITED                 >
    PARTNERSHIP,                              >>
                            Plaintiffs and    >
                            Counterclaim      >
                            Defendants,       >>
           V.                                 >         Civil Action No. 16387
                                                                            - N C
                                              )
    JAMES R. MOFFETT, RICHARD C.              >
    ADKERSON, B.M. RANKIN and                 >
    HENRY A. KISSINGER,                       >>
                           Defendants and     >
                            Counterclaim      >
                           Plaintiffs,        >>
           and                                >>
    MCMORAN OIL & GAS COMPANY,                >>
                           Defendant.         >
    
                    REPLY MEMORANDUM OF LAW OF DEFENDANT                             __
                                                                                     -3
                        DR. HENRY A. KISSINGER IN SUPPORT OF HIS
                       MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS
    
    
                                              David C. McBride
                                              YOUNG CONAWAY STARGATT
    OF COUNSEL:                                     & TAYLOR, LLP
                                              1 lth Floor, Rodney Square North
    Warren R. Stern                           P.O. Box 391
    Paula -N. Gordon                          Wilmington, Delaware 19899-03 9 1
    WACHTELL, LIPTON,                         (302) 571-6639
     ROS.EN & KATZ
    51 West 52nd Street
    New York, New York 100 19
    (212) `103-1000
    
    
    WP3:  M:U)OCS3U'UBL\031'~RIEF~262352-1 54725.1001
    
    
    
                                                 TABLE OF CONTENTS
    
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
  • Counterclaim>
  • Defendants and>
  • That IGL Lacks Standing To Pursue
  • Bangor Punta Operations, Inc. v. Bangor & Aroostook Railroad Company,
  • Council of South Bethanv v. Sandpiper Dev.
  • Memorandum for the reasons stated herein.
  • its own alleged wrongdoing or alleged wrongdoing in which it participated or acquiesced.
  • Brief at 8 (citing Gottlieb v. MC@, Del.
  • Second, IGL, as the controlling general partner of PLP cannot bring suit on
  • behalf of PLP or cause PLP to bring the suit which IGL could not bring directly.
  • 703 and Courtland Manor Inc. v. Leeds,
  • IGL does not dispute the factual basis for the
  • Those facts are alleged in the Amended Complaint: FTX breached its
  • successor shareholder from bringing suit directly or indirectly.
  • to the extent the Bangor doctrine attributes the disability
  • there was neither a disability nor a liability that passed from the
  • transaction as a predicate to the application of the doctrine.
  • Jacobs, V.C. the Court barred a counterclaim where the controlling
  • No purchase transaction of any
  • he could not assert himself.
  • The Plaintiff Is Incorrect When Asserting
  • that Elangor Punta does not apply he:re because "IGL does not seek to recover anything
  • but rather seeks to recover from the former directors of FTX
  • are the alleged "primary wrongdoers."
  • is the corporate general partner, not its directors, which has a fiduciary duty to the
  • LLC, supra at slip op.

  • 3 . PLAINTIFFS MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO DISMISS

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    PLAINTIFFS
    MOTIONS
    COURT
    PLP
    DISMISS
    PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT
    DEL
    DELAWARE
    IGL
    OPPOSITION
    AMENDED COMPLAINT
    LAW
    MOXY
    FTX
    RESCISSION
    FIDUCIARY DUTIES
    MEMORANDUM
    GENERAL PARTNER
    FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
    BANGOR PUNTA
    TRANSACTIONS
    PARTNERSHIP
    FRP
    DIRECTORS
    WRONGDOING
    SHAREHOLDERS
    UNITHOLDERS
    AUTHORITIES
    ALLEGATIONS
    
          IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY IN THE STATE OF DELAWARE
                             IN AND FOR NEW CASTLE COUNTY
    
    IMC GLOBAL INC. and PHOSPHATE :
    RESOURCE PARTNERS LIMITED                :
    PARTNERSHIP,                             ..
                                             .
                  Plaintiffs and             ..
                  Counterclaim Defendants, :
    
          V.                                 :      C. A. No. 16387-NC
                                             ..
    JAMES R. MOFFETT, RICHARD C.             :
    ADKERSON, B. M. RANKIN, and              :
    HENRY A. KISSINGER,                      ..
                  Defendants and             ..
                  Counterclaim Plaintiffs, :..
                  and                        ..
    MCMORAN OIL & GAS CO.,                   ...
                  Defendant.                 ..
    
                PLAINTIFFS' MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN OPPOSITION
                         TO DEFENDANTS' MOTIONS TQ DISMISS
    
    
    William A. Brewer III                           Jay W. Eisenhofer                   I
    James S. Renard                                 Stuart M. Grant         L -
    BICKEL & BREWER                                 Megan D. McIntyre              '
    4800 Bank One Center                            GRANT & EISENHOFER, P.A.
    1717 Main Street                                1220 N. Market Street, Suite 500
    Dallas, Texas 75201                             Wilmington, Delaware 19801
    Telephone: (214) 653-4000                       Telephone: (302) 622-7000
    Telecopier: (214) 653-1014                      Telecopier: (302) 622-7100
    
    
    Dated: May 19, 1999
    
    
    
                                                   TABLE OF CONTENTS
    
    
    
    TABLE OF AUTHORITIES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
    
    I.       PRELIMINARY STATEMENT . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
    
    II.      PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . .
    
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY IN THE STATE OF DELAWARE
  • PLAINTIFFS' MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN OPPOSITION
  • TO DEFENDANTS' MOTIONS TQ DISMISS
  • FACTS APPLICABLE TO DEFENDANTS' MOTIONS
  • Partnership And To Its Limited Partners And General Partner
  • ARGUMENTS AND AUTHORITIES.
  • The Bangor Punta doctrine is not applicable because
  • because IGL became the general partner of PLP as a
  • Defendants' Wrongdoing.
  • Corp., Del.

  • 4 . FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    MOFFETT
    DEFENDANTS
    FTX
    MOXY
    FRP
    PARTNER
    PLAINTIFFS
    TRANSACTIONS
    GAS
    OIL
    ADKERSON
    PARTNERSHIP
    DIRECTORS
    LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
    RANKIN
    ASSETS
    SPECIAL COMMITTEE
    FRP-MOXY TRANSACTIONS
    DAVIS POLK
    PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT
    FIDUCIARY DUTIES
    CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
    PLP
    EXPLORATION
    MANAGING GENERAL PARTNER
    FCX
    INDIVIDUAL DEFENDANTS
    UNITHOLDERS
    MERRILL LYNCH
    
                   IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE                                 '
                                 IN AND FOR NEW CASTLE COUNTY
    
     IMC GLOBAL INC. and PHOSPHATE                  9
     RESOURCE PARTNERS LIMITED                      8
     PARTNERSHIP,                                  9                                     L.     1
                                                   3
             Plaintiffs,                            98
     vs.                                           9§           CIVIL ACTION NO. 16387-NC
     JAMES R. MOFFETT, RICHARD C.
     ADKERSON, B.M. RANKIN, HENRY                  0
     A. KISSINGER, and MCMORAN OIL                 9
     & GAS CO.,                                     99
             Defendants.                           8
    
    
                                   FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
    
            Plaintiffs IMC Global Inc. and Phosphate Resource Partners Limited Partnership ("PLP")
    
    file this First Amended Complaint, on personal knowledge with respect to themselves and their own
    
    acts and on information and belief as to all other matters, against defendants James R. Moffett,
    
    Richard C. Adkerson, B.M. Rankin, Henry A. Kissinger, and McMoRan Oil & Gas Co. ("MOXY"),
    
    as follows:
    
                                                          I.
    
                                    PRELIMINARY STATEMENT
    
            1.      It is often said that loyalty divided leads to trust betrayed. This case relates how
    
    defendant James "Jim Bob" Moffett and the "daisy chain" of publicly-traded entities he controls
    
    have consistently and repeatedly betrayed the trust others have placed in them. Employing a highly-
    
    sophisticated shell game, Moffett and his cohorts have moved assets and shifted risks among
    
    
    
    affiliated companies in cavalier disregard of the rights of their public owners and always to his
    
    benefit. The success of those schemes, as well as Moffett's  continued dominance over those
    
    was assured through his clever utilizationof nearly-identical,overlapping  boards comprised of hand-
    
    picked directors.
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • Plaintiffs IMC Global Inc. and Phosphate Resource Partners Limited Partnership
  • Richard C. Adkerson, B.M. Rankin, Henry A. Kissinger, and McMoRan Oil & Gas Co.,
  • defendant James "Jim Bob" Moffett and the "daisy chain" of publicly-traded entities he
  • was assured through his clever utilizationof nearly-identical,overlapping boards comprised of
  • detriment and disadvantage of plaintiffs- whose interests the individual defendants were
  • Joining Moffett in implementing those transactions were his cronies
  • (including defendants Adkerson and Rankin)
  • orchestrated a rubber-stamp approval of those transactions using a sham "special committee"
  • transactions and who, in turn, relied heavily on unverified information provided by MOXY;
  • the chief executive officer of PLP's corporate general partner who, not coincidentally,was
  • plaintiff PLP in the absence of the incestuous relationships between and among MOXY and the
  • directors of PLP's managing general partner.
  • managing general partner and controlling unitholder.
  • FTX was formed in 1981 as the result of a merger between Freeport Minerals
  • Company and McMoRan Exploration, a company founded by defendant Jim Bob Moffett.
  • including oil and gas exploration and mineral mining.
  • half of the 198Os, however, FTX sold off many of its assets to a number of newly-formed,
  • FRP in 1986.
  • PLP is widely-dispersed among hundreds of public unitholders,
  • FTX, FCX, and other Moffett-controlledcompanies, for which he earned millions of dollars of
  • Davis Polk, which had represented various Freeport entities since the 1950s drafted the
  • The Participation Agreement the essential terms of which were negotiated by Davis Polk on
  • Defendants Scramble To Implement The FRP-MOXY Transactions While Avoidiw Lena1 Liabilitv.
  • Kissinger - selected Merrill Lynch & Co..
  • the individuals who served on the boards of those companies owed fiduciary duties to their

  • 5 . BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO DISMISS

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    FTX
    MERGER
    PLAINTIFFS
    PLP
    COURT
    STANDING
    DEFENDANTS
    RESCISSION
    MOXY
    FRP
    SELF DEFEATING ALLEGATIONS
    COMPLAINT
    TRANSACTIONS
    EQUITY
    MCMORAN OIL
    GAS
    DISMISS
    CIRCUMVENT
    PARTNERSHIP
    BANGOR PUNTA
    OWNERSHIP
    IGL LACKS
    DISABILITY
    JOINT PROXY
    MANAGING GENERAL PARTNER
    STOCKHOLDERS
    SHAREHOLDERS
    PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT
    IGL-FTX MERGER
    
              IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
    
                                IN AND FOR NEW CASTLE COUNTY
    
    IMC GLOBAL INC. and PHOSPHATE            )
    RESOURCE PARTNERS LIMITED                )
    PARTNERSHIP,                             11
                 Plaintiffs and Counterclaim )
                 Defendants,                 1)    C.A. No. 16387-NC
                 V.                          >
                                             )
    JAMES R. MOFFETT,  RICHARD C.            )
    ADKERSON, B.M. RANKIN  and               1
    HENRY A. KISSINGER                       11
                 Defendants and              )
                 Counterclaim Plaintiffs, )
                                             1
                 and                         11
    MCMORAN OIL & GAS CO.,                   )1
                Defendant .                  )
    
                         DEFENDANT MCMORAN OIL & GAS CO.`S
                OPENING BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF ITS MOTION TO DISMISS
    
    
    
                                            MORRIS, JAMES, HITCHENS  & WILLIAMS
                                            Henry N. Herndon, Jr.
                                            Lewis H. Lazarus
                                            James E. Drnec
                                            222 Delaware Avenue, 10th Floor
                                            P.O. Box 2306
                                            Wilmington, Delaware 19899
                                            (302) 888-6800
                                            Attorneys for Defendant McMoRan Oil & Gas Co.
    
    March 31, 1999
    
    
    
                                             TABLE OF CONTENTS
    
                                                                                                       
    
    TABLEOFAUTHORITIES.........................................ii
    
    NATURE AND STAGE OF THE PROCEEDINGS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
    
    STATEMENTOFFACTS..........................................3
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
  • Plaintiffs and Counterclaim)
  • DEFENDANT MCMORAN OIL & GAS CO.`S OPENING BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF ITS MOTION TO DISMISS
  • The Complaint's Self Defeating Allegations
  • Background Of The IGL-FTX Merger.
  • HAVING ACQUIRED ITS OWNERSHIP
  • INTEREST IN PLP FROM FTX, IGL LACKS
  • DISABILITY
  • EQUITABLE RESCISSION
  • Inc. by the Amended Complaint is
  • Limited Partnership transactions that IGL's predecessor entity, Freeport-McMoRan,
  • or through PLP against the other defendants under the principles of Bangor Punta'.
  • The original Complaint contained no allegation of bad faith, which under PLP's partnership
  • l "FTX controlled all matters relating to the management of FRP [now
  • reorganization of MOXY at the expense and risk of FRP",
  • the Joint Proxy of IGL and FTX
  • with those leases and other leases subject to the Participation Agreement,
  • IGL LACKS STANDING TO MAINTAIN THE
  • ACTION AND CANNOT USE PLP TO CIRCUMVENT THAT
  • he who participates in an action has no standing in a court of equity to complain against it.
  • when for that reason the stockholders
  • shareholders who acquired their shares prior to the alleged

  • 6 . ANSWER OF DEFENDANT MCMORAN OIL & GAS

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    PARAGRAPH
    ALLEGATIONS
    DENIES
    MOXY
    ADMITS
    PARTNERSHIP
    AGREEMENT
    PLAINTIFFS
    FTX
    RESPONSE
    DEFENSE
    IGL
    REFERS
    LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
    DEFENDANT
    PURPORT
    FRP
    DOCTRINE
    MCMORAN OIL
    GAS
    ADMISSION
    PLP
    FULLY SET
    PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT
    MASTER AGREEMENT
    MOXY INCORPORATES
    REFERENCE
    RELIEF
    DIRECTORS
    
    .
                 IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
    
                            IN AND FOR NEW CASTLE C!OUNTY
    
         IMC GLOBAL INC. and PHOSPHATE
         RESOURCE PARTNERS LIMITED
         PARTNERSHIP,
                                                ;
                                Plaintiffs,
                                                !    Civ. A. No. 16387-NC
                                                                        _... , '. .
                     V .                                         r  .'  .-.'.:
                                                                 -. ..(
                                                ;                ..,'I             I
                                                                 .I                     :r .  ".:
         JAMES R. MOFFETT, RICHARD C.                            --._  ..,^-
         ADKERSON, B.M. RANKIN, HENRY A.        ;                i:  j
         KISSINGER and MCMORAN OIL & GAS                                           _^._
                                                                 .-
         co.,                                   i                 -.  _..
                                                                                        _
                                Defendants,     i                                            !. .
                                                                  y..                   _-
                                                                       -- -_            ., \
                                ANSWER OF DEFENDANT                                     &
                                                                           --.,
                               MCMORAN OIL & GAS C O .
    
                     Defendant  McMoRan Oil  & Gas Co.  ("MOXYtl),  by its
    
         undersigned attorneys, answers the Complaint of plaintiffs
    
         IMC Global Inc.  ("IGL") and Phosphate Resource Partners
    
         Limited Partnership  ("PLP") (collectively the  "Plaintiffs*1),
    
         as follows:
    
                     1. Denies generally the allegations of paragraph
    
         1 of the complaint and avers that the allegations contained
    
         in the second, third and fourth sentences of paragraph 1,
    
         which purport to state legal conclusions, require neither
    
         admission nor denial, except admits u:pon information and
    
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • RESOURCE PARTNERS LIMITED PARTNERSHIP,
  • MCMORAN OIL & GAS C O.
  • Defendant McMoRan Oil & Gas Co.,
  • answers the Complaint of plaintiffs
  • Limited Partnership,
  • Denies generally the allegations of paragraph
  • of the complaint and avers that the allegations contained
  • unitholder of PLP,
  • Partners, L.P., admits upon information and belief
  • and admits that the Plaintiffs purport to bring this action
  • Rankin were directors of both FTX and MOXY.
  • FRP was formed in 1986 and avers that until December 22,
  • Complaint, except admits that on December 22, 1997 IGL merged with FTX and upon information
  • and refers to the Participation Agreement between
  • Agreement"), and the Master Agreement between MOXY and FRP,
  • As its response to paragraph 21 of the
  • MOXY incorporates by reference its responses to
  • paragraphs l-20 of the Complaint as if fully set forth
  • Complaint, which purport to state legall conclusions, require neither admission nor denial.
  • As its response to paragrraph 32 of the Complaint, MOXY incorporates by reference its
  • allegations of the Complaint and requests for relief.
  • SECOND ADDITIONAL DEFENSE
  • by the doctrine of ratification.
  • the defendant McMoRan Oil & Gas Co.
  •    |