Schnatter, Papa John's Settle Del. Lawsuit Over Control of Pizza Chain
The agreement, filed this week with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, also requires Papa John's to sever a voting agreement with an activist investor and scrap a provision of its poison pill that prevented stockholders from opposing certain board actions.
March 06, 2019 at 01:57 PM
3 minute read
Papa John's founder John Schnatter has agreed to resign from the company's board as part of the settlement of a Delaware Chancery Court lawsuit, which targeted investor restrictions tied to a poison pill that the company adopted in the wake of his ouster as the pizza chain's chief executive.
The agreement, filed this week with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, also requires Papa John's to sever a voting agreement with an activist investor and scrap a provision of its poison pill that prevented stockholders from opposing certain board actions. Together, Schnatter and the company would select an independent director to serve on an expanded Papa John's board, according to the regulatory finding.
Schnatter, who owns about 31 percent of the company's shares, would relinquish his board seat once the new independent director is appointed.
The settlement puts an end to a contentious and multifaceted legal battle that Schnatter launched last year in Delaware, after he resigned as chairman amid reports that he had used a racial slur during a company training call. In January, Chancery Court Chancellor Andre G. Bouchard allowed Schnatter to access corporate documents related to his ouster, but said that any production would be limited to Schnatter's changing roles at the company.
Last month, Schnatter took aim in a separate Chancery Court lawsuit at the poison pill, which the company adopted in July to prevent him from acquiring any more stock. According to Schnatter's complaint, the poison pill contained a so-called “wolf-pack provision,” which prevents major investors like Schnatter from teaming up with other stockholders to take control of the company.
According to Schnatter, it was solely up to a special committee of the Papa John's board to decide when stockholders were “acting in concert” under the provision, essentially preventing investors from opposing corporate actions that they disagreed with.
The settlement, however, nixes the poison pill's “acting in concert” provision and obligates the company to scrap a requirement that Starboard Value LP, a New York investing fund that owns a nearly 10-percent stake in Papa John's, to vote in favor of the incumbent board at the company's annual stockholder meeting, currently slated for May.
Schnatter was represented in the case by Garland A. Kelley of Glaser Weil Fink Howard Avchen & Shapiro in Los Angeles and Peter B. Ladig, Brett M. McCartney and Elizabeth A. Powers of Bayard in Wilmington.
Under the settlement, Schnatter would still receive all the corporate documents obtained through his books-and-records action, and he retains his ability to assert new legal claims if those documents reveal additional wrongdoing on the part of company insiders.
In a statement, Schnatter said he was eager to work with Starboard CEO Jeffrey Smith and put the litigation behind him.
“I'm happy that we were able to enter into this agreement and allow the new leadership being implemented by Jeff Smith and Starboard to help Papa John's regain its strength and market position,” Schnatter said.
“I care deeply about its employees, franchisees and investors and am thankful that I've been able to resolve these important issues, and that we can all focus on the company's business without the need for additional litigation.”
A spokesman for the company declined Wednesday to comment on the settlement.
The Delaware case was captioned Schnatter v. Shapiro.
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 AllBeyond Meat Faces Shareholder Suit Over Ability to Produce Product at Scale
New Derivative Suit Says Kraft Heinz Shareholders Were Misled on Post-Merger Losses
3 minute readSupreme Court Will Again Be Focus of IP World in 2023
Trending Stories
- 1Pardoning Jan. 6 Defendants May Send Bad Message About Insurrection, Rule of Law
- 2Looming Clash Over Abortion Pills Shows Overturning 'Roe v. Wade' Settled Nothing
- 33rd Circuit Strikes Down NLRB’s Monetary Remedies for Fired Starbucks Workers
- 4Latest Class of Court Officers Sworn into Service in New York
- 5Kirkland's Daniel Lavon-Krein: Staying Ahead of Private Equity Consolidation
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