Indiana Federal Court Rejects Disclosure-Only Settlement
Margrave Law, together with Einterz & Einterz, successfully represented a stockholder objector in a challenge to a disclosure-only M&A settlement before the United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana. On August 16, 2017, the Indiana court held that none of the supplemental disclosures offered as consideration to stockholders were plainly material and declined to approve the settlement. The court also denied plaintiffs’ request for over $400,000 in attorneys’ fees and expenses.
The decision, Bushansky v. Remy International, Inc., et al., ___ F.3d ___, 2017 WL 3530108 (S.D. Ind. Aug. 16, 2017), applies the standard for approval of disclosure settlements promulgated by the Delaware Court of Chancery in In re Trulia, Inc. Stockholder Litigation, 129 A.3d 884 (Del. Ch. 2016) and adopted by the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit in In re Walgreen Co. Stockholder Litigation, 832 F.3d 718 (7th Cir. 2016).