Len J. Dillon v. F. Steven Berg

453 F.2d 876, 1971 U.S. App. LEXIS 6327
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit
DecidedDecember 30, 1971
Docket71-1520, 71-1760
StatusPublished
Cited by30 cases

This text of 453 F.2d 876 (Len J. Dillon v. F. Steven Berg) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Len J. Dillon v. F. Steven Berg, 453 F.2d 876, 1971 U.S. App. LEXIS 6327 (3d Cir. 1971).

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

PER CURIAM:

Finding that a solicitation of proxies for the 1970 annual shareholders’ meeting of Scotten, Dillon Company, a corporation, had been supported by accompanying data that was materially false and misleading, the District Court for the District of Delaware has ruled that the proxies thus obtained and the meeting at which they were voted were illegal. 1971, 326 F.Supp. 1214. The order of the court also contained detailed provisions for calling and conducting a special shareholders’ meeting at which the qualified shareholders would be, as nearly as practicable, those who were eligible to participate in the voided meeting. This appeal has been taken from that order.

Several of the representations in the proxy material were correct and valid only if Ralph R. Power, a director of the corporation, had resigned in April 1970. In the circumstances permissibly found by the district court and set out in its opinion, we agree that the purported resignation of Power was not effective. Therefore, significant proxy materials were in fact false and misleading in several particulars enumerated and discussed in the opinion of the district court. 326 F.Supp. at 1223, 1225-1228. We find it unnecessary to consider other challenged proxy materials that were unrelated to the status of Power.

Both the action of the district court in invalidating the 1970 annual shareholders’ meeting and its prescription of conditions of eligibility for participation in a special meeting to be held pursuant to the court’s order were proper.

The judgment will be affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Kaufman v. Allemang
70 F. Supp. 3d 682 (D. Delaware, 2014)
Kurz v. Holbrook
989 A.2d 140 (Court of Chancery of Delaware, 2010)
Murray v. Conseco, Inc.
766 N.E.2d 38 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 2002)
Ahn v. Lee
471 S.E.2d 38 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1996)
In Re Westinghouse Securities Litigation
832 F. Supp. 989 (W.D. Pennsylvania, 1993)
In Re Delmarva Securities Litigation
794 F. Supp. 1293 (D. Delaware, 1992)
D & N Financial Corp. v. RCM Partners Ltd. Partnership
735 F. Supp. 1242 (D. Delaware, 1990)
Donald J. Wylie v. The Marley Company
891 F.2d 1463 (Tenth Circuit, 1989)
Stroud v. Milliken Enterprises, Inc.
585 A.2d 1306 (Court of Chancery of Delaware, 1988)
Edelman v. Salomon
559 F. Supp. 1178 (D. Delaware, 1983)
International Games, Inc. v. Sims
444 N.E.2d 736 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1982)
King v. Edwards
559 F. Supp. 75 (N.D. Georgia, 1982)
Ash v. GAF Corp.
546 F. Supp. 89 (E.D. Pennsylvania, 1982)
Halpern v. Armstrong
491 F. Supp. 365 (S.D. New York, 1980)
Bertoglio v. Texas International Co.
488 F. Supp. 630 (D. Delaware, 1980)
Malhas v. Shinn
597 F.2d 28 (Second Circuit, 1979)
American Center for Education, Inc. v. Cavnar
80 Cal. App. 3d 476 (California Court of Appeal, 1978)
Cohen v. Ayers
449 F. Supp. 298 (N.D. Illinois, 1978)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
453 F.2d 876, 1971 U.S. App. LEXIS 6327, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/len-j-dillon-v-f-steven-berg-ca3-1971.