IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
IN AND FOR NEW CASTLE COUNTY
JOHN ABAJIAN and MIRIAM
SARNOFF, On Behalf of
Themselves and All Others
Similarly Situated, and ;
Derivatively on Behalf of 1
Alaska Air Group, Inc., 1
Plaintiffs, ;
V. \ i Civil Action No. 11425
BRUCE R. KENNEDY: O.F.
BENECXE; WILLIAM H. CLAPP;
RONALD F. COSGRAVE; MARY JANE
FATE; BYRON I. MALLOTT;
ROBERT L. PARKER, JR.;
FRANK G. TURPIN; J. RAY
VINGO ; RICHARD A. WEIN; and
INTERNATIONAL LEASE FINANCE
CORPORATION,
Defendants,
,'
and
ALASKA AIR-GROUP, INC., a
D e l a w a r e corporation,
Nominal Defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Date Submitted: June 18, 1991
Date Decided: January 17, 1992
Joseph A. Rosenthal, Esquire, of MORRIS, ROSENTKAL, MONHAIT &
GROSS, P.A., Wilmington, Delaware; Of Counsel : Melvyn Weiss,
Esquire and Steven G. Schulman e Esquire, of MILBERG, WEISS,
BERSHAD, SPECTHRIE & LERACH, New York, New York; BETTS, PATTERSON
& MINES, B.S., Seattle, Washington; STULL, STULL & BRODY, New
York, New York; Attorneys for Plaintiffs.
Kenneth J. Nachbar, Esquire, of MORRIS, NICHOLS, ARSHT & TUNNELI;,
Wilmington, Delaware; Of Counsel: Rona:Ld L. Berenstain, Esquire,
and Barry M. Kaplan, Esquire, of PERKINS COIE, Seattle,
Washington; Attorneys for Director Defendants.
E. Norman Veasey, Esquire, Gregory v. Varallo, Esquire, C.
Stephen Bigler, Esquire, Robert J. Stearn, Jr.,, Esquire, Robert
J. Kriner, Jr., Esquire, and Frederick L. CottrelX, III, Esquire,
of RICHARDS, LAYTON & FINGER, Wilmington, Delawilre; Of Counsel:
O'MELVENY & MYERS, Los Angeles, California; Attorneys for
SNIPPETS:
IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
INTERNATIONAL LEASE FINANCE CORPORATION,
Joseph A. Rosenthal, Esquire, of MORRIS, ROSENTKAL, MONHAIT &
Esquire and Steven G. Schulman e Esquire, of MILBERG, WEISS, BERSHAD, SPECTHRIE & LERACH, New
Washington; Attorneys for Director Defendants.
J. Kriner, Jr., Esquire, and Frederick L. CottrelX, III, Esquire, of RICHARDS, LAYTON &
This stockholders class and derivative action challenges a number of related transactions
The transactions that inspire this charge are an interrelated group of financial transactions
plaintiffs assert that the transactions have been misrepresented to shareholders and in fact
Plaintiffs are stockholders of Alaska Air who allegedly have owned their stock at all times
Pending are motions to dismiss the Amended Complaint on grounds that insofar as it purports
For the reasons that fol:Low I conclude that the facts alleged in the Amended Complaint are
Finally, ILFC will be dismissed 'because, for the reason set forth at pp. 20 - 27, I conclude
With respect to the right to vote the preferred stock, OL communicate with other shareholders
From these alleged facts plaintiffs seek to assert claims of two general types: substantive
See Moran v. Household International, Inc., Del.
Focusing only on the allegations of substantive wrong, it seems apparent that each element of
Plaintiffs allege that as a result of these and other actions, ILFC purposefully subjected
the plaintiffs assert a conspiracy theory of jurisdiction as an independent basis of
|
