Pa.-Based Nutrisystem Faces Investor Suit Over $1.3B Sale to Health Company
In an 18-page complaint, shareholders Thursday questioned analyses by Nutrisystem's Evercore Group financial advisers and said that the cash-and-stock deal, announced in December, had undervalued the company.
January 10, 2019 at 02:52 PM
3 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Delaware Business Court Insider
Nutrisystem Inc. investors have sued the Pennsylvania-based diet and weight-loss company over its planned $1.3 billion sale to Tivity Health Inc., claiming that Nutrisystem brass has withheld key data ahead of a stockholder vote expected in the coming months.
In an 18-page complaint, shareholders Thursday questioned analyses by Nutrisystem's Evercore Group financial advisers and said that the cash-and-stock deal, announced in December, had undervalued the company. Though a date has not yet been set for a shareholder vote, Nutrisystem and Nashville, Tennessee, area-based Tivity have said they plan to close the merger in the first quarter of 2019.
“It is therefore imperative that the material information that has been omitted from the Proxy is disclosed prior to the Stockholder Vote so Nutrisystem stockholders can properly exercise their corporate suffrage rights,” plaintiffs attorneys from Gainey McKenna & Egleston and O'Kelly Ernst & Joyce said in the filing.
Tivity announced Dec. 17 that it would acquire Nutrisystem, which is headquartered in Fort Washington, Pennsylvania, in a deal that would expand its fitness and nutrition portfolio and better position it to offer weight-management services. Under the agreement, Nutrisystem investors would receive $38.75 in cash plus a portion of the new company's shares for their stock, though Tivity shareholders would own 87 percent of the combined company.
Tivity said it expects to maintain all existing Nutrisystem brands, which include the South Beach Diet and DNA Body Blueprint, as well as Nutrisystem's Fort Washington headquarters.
Plaintiff Melvin Klein, a Nutrisystem investor, said Evercore's analyses omitted key financial inputs, which led the firm to undervalue Nutrisystem's overall worth in materials that were submitted to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission earlier this week.
“The merger consideration is unfair because, among other things, the intrinsic value of the company is in excess of the amount the company's stockholders will receive in connection with the proposed transaction,” the complaint said. “It is therefore imperative that the company common stockholders receive the material information that defendants have omitted from the proxy so that they can meaningfully assess whether the proposed transaction is in their best interests prior to the vote.”
The two-count complaint alleges violations of the Securities Exchange Act and asks for for the merger to be postponed until the alleged deficiencies are cured. Should the deal be consummated before then, plaintiffs are seeking damages and any special benefits obtained by Nutrisystem's directors resulting from alleged breaches of their fiduciary duties.
A spokeswoman for Nutrisystem did not immediately respond Thursday to a call seeking comment on the lawsuit.
Klein is represented by Ryan M. Ernst of O'Kelly Ernst in Wilmington and Thomas J. McKenna and Gregory M. Egleston of Gainey McKenna in New York.
An online docket tracking service did not list counsel for Nutrisystem and its directors.
The case, captioned Klein v. Nutrisystem, has not yet been assigned to a judge.
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 AllPennsylvania Law Schools Are Seeing Double-Digit Boosts in 2025 Applications
5 minute readPa. Defense Firm Sued by Client Over Ex-Eagles Player's $43.5M Med Mal Win
3 minute readAm Law 100 Lateral Partner Hiring Rose in 2024: Report
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