STARVEST PARTNERS II, L.P., ET AL., plf-res, v. EMPORTAL, INC., def-ap

8182. STARVEST PARTNERS II, L.P., ET AL., plf-res, v. EMPORTAL, INC., def-ap — Law Offices of Kirk B. Freeman, San Francisco, CA (Kirk B. Freeman of the bar of the State of California, admitted pro hac vice, of counsel), for ap — Ropes & Gray LLP, New York (John C. Ertman of counsel), for res — Order and judgment (one paper), Supreme Court, New York County (Ira Gammerman, J.H.O.), entered February 15, 2011, which, insofar as appealed from as limited by the briefs, granted plaintiffs' Starvest) motion to dismiss defendant Emportal's first through third and seventh through ninth counterclaims and granted plaintiffs summary judgment declaring that they had no liability to defendant, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

8182. STARVEST PARTNERS II, L.P., ET AL., plf-res, v. EMPORTAL, INC., def-ap — Law Offices of Kirk B. Freeman, San Francisco, CA (Kirk B. Freeman of the bar of the State of California, admitted pro hac vice, of counsel), for ap — Ropes & Gray LLP, New York (John C. Ertman of counsel), for res — Order and judgment (one paper), Supreme Court, New York County (Ira Gammerman, J.H.O.), entered February 15, 2011, which, insofar as appealed from as limited by the briefs, granted plaintiffs’ Starvest) motion to dismiss defendant Emportal’s first through third and seventh through ninth counterclaims and granted plaintiffs summary judgment declaring that they had no liability to defendant, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

This action arises from Emportal’s solicitation of venture capital financing from New York-based StarVest in late 2008. Emportal, a California-based software company, discussed with StarVest the possibility of StarVest purchasing approximately $3.5 million worth of Emportal preferred stock. After conducting some preliminary due diligence, StarVest decided to work alongside another venture capital firm named Leapfrog Ventures (Leapfrog). These firms discussed with Emportal the possibility of providing a total of $7 million in funding in exchange for a combined 40 percent equity interest in the company. In September 2008, Emportal ceased discussions with StarVest and Leapfrog after selecting another venture capital syndicate to provide funding. That syndicate decided in October 2008 not to proceed with the financing. That same month, StarVest and Leapfrog made it known to Emportal that they remained interested in providing a combined investment of 6.5 million for a total of 65 percent of shareholders’ equity.

STARVEST PARTNERS II, L.P., ET AL., plf-res, v. EMPORTAL, INC., def-ap

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to New York Law Journal