Hedge Fund Sues Bootmaker Over Board Election
Marcato Capital Management on Monday sued the manufacturer of UGG boots, Deckers Outdoor Corp., in the Delaware Court of Chancery in a bid to force a vote on the hedge fund's board nominees and avoid more than $120 million in financial penalties against the company.
October 24, 2017 at 06:02 PM
3 minute read
Marcato Capital Management on Monday sued the manufacturer of UGG boots, Deckers Outdoor Corp., in the Delaware Court of Chancery in a bid to force a vote on the hedge fund's board nominees and avoid more than $120 million in financial penalties against the company.
The lawsuit was the latest escalation in a proxy fight launched last month by Marcato's Mick McGuire, who has been pressuring the company into a sale. Marcato, which holds an 8.4 percent stake in Deckers, has proposed its own slate of 10 directors to replace Deckers' entire board and seize control of the company.
In a 32-page complaint, Marcato said Deckers has refused to approve its nominees, arguing it would trigger a change-of-control provision that would force $103 million in debt to come due under a credit agreement and trigger $19 million in equity awards and payments to Deckers' executives.
The hedge fund asked the court to enforce the Dec. 14 date for the planned stockholder meeting and to designate its nominees as “continuing directors” in order to disable the provision in the agreement.
“Quite simply, the board has no good faith basis to believe that the Marcato nominees pose a danger to the interests of the company or the stockholders, and therefore must approve and nominate the Marcato nominees in accordance with their fiduciary duties,” Marcato said. “The board's refusal to approve and nominate the Marcato nominees serves no corporate interest and has no purpose other than to maintain the director defendants in office.”
Deckers has said that Marcato's request was not in “the best interests of the company and its stockholders,” and that it lacks the ability to alter the terms of the credit agreement before the election of a dissident slate of directors. On Tuesday, the company said it would vigorously defend the action.
“Our annual meeting of stockholders is already scheduled for Dec. 14, 2017,” Deckers said in a statement. “Marcato's lawsuit is unnecessary, a distraction from our successful transformation, and a self-serving attempt to advance its own interests at the expense of all other stockholders.”
Marcato said that the Dec. 14 meeting date is likely a violation of Delaware law, which requires, in most instances, that companies hold the annual gatherings within 13 months of each other. The upcoming meeting is scheduled 15 months after the stockholders last met in September 2016.
Marcato said Deckers has not yet confirmed the date of the annual meeting amid concerns from the board that a proxy contest would hamper the company's busy winter shopping season. But Marcato said Deckers had “manufactured” the crisis by delaying the meeting until mid-December, and it feared that Deckers would just try to postpone the meeting again.
“The board's refusal to confirm the annual meeting date bolsters Marcato's concern that the director defendants may seek to hold on to their seats by delaying their day of reckoning at the ballot box. The court should not permit the company to stall corporate democracy any longer,” Marcato said.
Marcato is represented by a team of attorneys from Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft, which recently advised the hedge fund on its successful proxy context against Buffalo Wild Wings Inc., which won Marcato three out of four seats on that company's board.
The Delaware case is captioned Marcato International v. Gibbons.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllLatham, Finnegan Win $115M Muscular Dystrophy Drug Patent Verdict for Counterclaimant
2 minute readDelaware Supreme Court Adopts Broad Interpretation of Case Law on Anticompetition Provisions
3 minute read3rd Circuit Nominee Mangi Sees 'No Pathway to Confirmation,' Derides 'Organized Smear Campaign'
4 minute readTrending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250