Investor Sues in Manhattan Federal Court to Halt $6.5B Energy Co. Sale to Australian Firm
The proposed class action argued that investors needed more information to decide whether to support the transaction at a scheduled special meeting of the company's limited partners July 31.
July 01, 2019 at 05:49 PM
3 minute read
An investor in Houston-based Buckeye Partners has sued to halt a planned vote on a proposed $6.5 billion deal to sell the petroleum distributor to an Australian investment-management firm, claiming that the firm's brass failed to disclose key financial information and possible conflicts among its directors.
The proposed class action, filed June 28 in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, argued that investors needed more information to decide whether to support the transaction at a scheduled special meeting of the company's limited partners July 31.
According to the filing, company insiders, including Buckeye's executives and directors, stood to receive “unique benefits” from the deal, including continued employment and cash payments. The suit also targeted financial inputs that the company's financial adviser, Wells Fargo Securities, considered in crafting its valuation analysis.
“Unless remedied, Buckeye's public unitholders will be forced to make a voting decision on the proposed transaction without full disclosure of all material information concerning the proposed transaction being provided to them,” attorneys for plaintiff John Ingalls wrote in a 17-page complaint.
The two-count complaint alleges securities laws violations and seeks a permanent injunction barring it from ever going into effect. A company spokesman did not immediately respond Monday to an email seeking comment on the lawsuit.
Buckeye, a Delaware company based in Houston, announced the sale in a May 10 press release. According to the company, the $41.50-per-unit all-cash deal represented a 27.5% premium to Buckeye's closing price the day prior.
Buckeye, which owns and operates one of the largest networks of integrated midstream assets in the country, said the deal would bring Buckeye under the “umbrella” of IFM, when the deal closes in the fourth quarter of 2019. It was subject to investor approval, as well as regulatory approvals and customary closing conditions.
IFM, a global institutional investment manager with $90 billion in funds under management, including $39.1 billion in infrastructure.
“The proposed transaction will provide immediate and enhanced value for our unitholders with an attractive premium that accelerates long-term returns and represents the underlying value of our business,” Clark C. Smith, Buckeye's president and CEO, said in a statement at the time. “In addition, the proposed transaction will provide Buckeye with superior access to capital to execute on its long-term business strategy.”
The company owns more than 6,000 miles of pipeline, and with over 100 delivery locations and 115 liquid petroleum products terminals, is a leading distributor in the East and Mid-West portions of the country.
Ingalls is represented by Richard A. Acocelli of WeissLaw in New York. An online docket-tracking service did not list counsel for Buckeye or its or the individual defendants Monday. As of Monday afternoon, it had not yet been assigned to a judge.
The case is captioned Ingalls v. Buckeye Partners.
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 AllOil Co. Alleges Plot to Drive Away Competition in NYC's Liquid Fuel Market
3 minute readGE Agrees to $362.5M Deal to End Shareholder Claims Over Power, Insurance Risks
2 minute readLukoil Pan Americas Sues Investment Firm Over Alleged $18 Million Breach
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