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
© 2025 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
- 1Uber Files RICO Suit Against Plaintiff-Side Firms Alleging Fraudulent Injury Claims
- 2The Law Firm Disrupted: Scrutinizing the Elephant More Than the Mouse
- 3Inherent Diminished Value Damages Unavailable to 3rd-Party Claimants, Court Says
- 4Pa. Defense Firm Sued by Client Over Ex-Eagles Player's $43.5M Med Mal Win
- 5Losses Mount at Morris Manning, but Departing Ex-Chair Stays Bullish About His Old Firm's Future
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
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