Latham & Watkins Secures $666M Award for Client in Hewlett Packard Accounting Dispute
The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York has unsealed an award from a New York arbitration panel that directs Hewlett Packard Enterprise Inc. to pay $666 million to a technology firm in a massive accounting dispute.
September 24, 2019 at 06:58 PM
4 minute read
The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York has unsealed an award from a New York arbitration panel that directs Hewlett Packard Enterprise Inc. to pay $666 million to a technology firm in a massive accounting dispute.
A spokesman for HP said the company would not challenge a motion by DXC Technology Co. and its Latham & Watkins attorneys to confirm the Aug. 15 award, filed Sept. 20 in Manhattan federal court. At the time, HPE announced the amount of the award, but the details of the case remained sealed until Friday.
The three-member arbitration panel found that HPE had breached an agreement to indemnify DXC for hundreds of millions of dollars in capital lease liabilities HPE had transferred in connection with the 2017 spinoff of its enterprise services business. That unit merged with technology and professional services provider Computer Sciences Corp. to form DXC.
According to court documents, CSC discovered just days before the deal that HPE had failed to disclose more than $1 billion in capital lease liabilities. In a last-minute effort to save the deal, HPE said it would convert the leases to operating leases under U.S. generally accepted accounting principles.
"CSC repeatedly sought information from HPE about its lease conversion methodology," DXC said in last week's filing. "But HPE shared very little information with CSC—and most of what it did share turned out to be false."
According to DXC, HPE had failed to convert the modified leases under GAAP, sticking DXC with roughly $1 billion in long-term capital lease liabilities over the $250 million cap the parties had initially agreed to in entering the deal. DXC said HPE did not respond to further requests for information, and the firm initiated arbitration proceedings in March 2018.
In an 86-page award ruling, the arbitrators found that the key components of HPE's lease conversion methodology violated GAAP and that nearly all of the disputed leases were capital leases, according to the motion.
The tech publication CRN Magazine reported last week that the decision was particularly critical of Hewlett Packard Financial Services Chief Financial Officer Ian Fowlis, who was found to have provided an expert with an altered financial document that was submitted as evidence and lacked candor in the proceedings.
The award directed HPE to pay approximately $632 million in excess capital lease liabilities, pre-award interest of $34 million and a 3% post-judgment interest, compounded quarterly from Aug. 15.
An attorney for HPE forwarded a request for comment to a company spokesman, who said HPE said it "strongly" disagreed with the panel's finding.
In a statement, HPE said any characterizations that Fowlis or the company had acted improperly were "simply unfounded," but did confirm that it would not oppose DXC's motion to confirm the award.
"This was an accounting dispute, and we are happy to put this matter behind us now that it has been resolved," HPE said.
Latham & Watkins partner Jamie Wine praised the ruling in a statement, saying the firm was happy to have secured the outcome for its client.
"We are pleased with the panel's unanimous award finding in DXC's favor and adopting DXC's presentation of the facts in this matter," Wine said.
DXC was represented by Wine, Abid Qureshi, Douglas Yatter, Hilary Mattis, Kuan Huang, Adam Shamah, Sid Nadkarni, Sindhu Boddu, Amella Viso, Jaclyn Newman and Chase Chesser, all of Latham.
HPE was represented by Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher. The federal court docket listed litigation associate Amy Rublin Mayer as counsel.
The motion to confirm is currently before U.S. District Judge Valerie E. Caproni of the Southern District of New York.
Read More:
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 AllJustices Pass on Service Providers' Challenge to NY's Broadband Rate Caps
3 minute readInvestors Sue in New York Over $440M International Crypto Ponzi Scheme
4 minute readBig Tech and Internet Companies Slammed With Consumer Class Actions in December
Trending 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