ADVERTISEMENT



Google       

Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Corporate Governance Blogs -> The Race to the Bottom

OR PHONE (866) 635-1838 for Bankruptcy Help, (866) 635-6190 for Divorce,
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense

Find a Local Lawyer

Bankruptcy (866) 635-1838
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402

Bookmark

Corporate Governance

: The Race to the Bottom

Chiquita Reaches Proposed Settlement

By Katharine Jensen

ADVERTISEMENTS

We have been following the Chiquita Brands International, Inc. ('Chiquita') case since August 2007.  The last post concerned plaintiffs' opposition to Chiquita's motion to dismiss.  The parties to the suit recently informed the court that they have settled the case.

The parties attempted mediation on October 5, 2009.  In a report filed on October 9, 2009, the Special Litigation Committee of Chiquita Brands International, Inc. ('SLC') noted that this mediation did not result in a negotiated solution.  Despite the unsuccessful mediation, the parties continued to discuss a possible settlement and, apparently, successfully reached an agreement.  While details of their deal are not known, on January 5, 2010 the plaintiffs and SLC jointly filed a Notice of Settlement.  Plaintiffs will agree to settle the derivative action and pending shareholder derivative lawsuit in the Ohio Court of Common Pleas.

The parties also intend to file a motion pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 23.1 seeking the Court's approval of a future settlement.  The parties have not disclosed the terms of their settlement, though the Notice does insinuate that some negotiation may remain.  It states that the potential settlement is dependent on the resolution of a  settlement agreement.

In addition, there have been some procedural developments.  On Dec. 23, 2009, the District Court filed an order addressing the parties' dispute over amending the complaint.  The court rejected Chiquita's position that the court should apply Rule 15(a) to preclude plaintiffs from filing an amended complaint as a matter of course prior to the court's ruling on the pending Rule 12(b)(6) motion.  In the December order, the court stated that any amended complaints must be filed by February 26, 2010.  In all other cases, amended complaints may only be filed with the opposing party's consent or court's leave.

The primary materials for this post can be found on the DU Corporate Governance website.

Full post as published by The Race to the Bottom on January 26, 2010 (boomark / email).

Bloggers, promote your law blog by nominating your blog for inclusion in USLaw.com's Law Blog Directory and RSS Reader. Benefits described.
Lawsuits and Settlements

Related Searches

























































































































US Law
#1 Online Legal Resource













Your Blog Subscriptions
Subscribe to blogs

10,000+ Law Job Listings
Lawyer . Police . Paralegal . Etc
Earn a law-related degree
Are you the author of this blog? Adding USLaw.com to your Blogroll increases relevance. You qualify to display a USLaw Network badge.
Suggest changes to this blog's description or nominate another for inclusion. Register for updates.


Practice Area
Zip Code:

Contact a Lawyer Now!






0.0206 secs (new cache)