ADVERTISEMENT



Google       

Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Legal News Blogs -> Law Blog - WSJ.com

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

Legal News

: Law Blog - WSJ.com

Judge Kaplan Reprimands Hedge Funds in Takeover Battle with CSX

By Dan Slater

ADVERTISEMENTS

judge kaplanTwo hedge funds who were sued by railroad CSX received a strongly-worded rebuke from NY District Judge Lewis Kaplan yesterday for the way they used swaps to plot a takeover of the company, and failed to disclose their coordinated actions.

In a 130-page opinion, Kaplan (pictured) found that that the two hedge funds — 3G Capital Partners and The Children’s Investment Fund — had consciously avoided securities laws in their proxy battle with CSX. He found that the two funds had jointly plotted a bid for control of CSX, but consciously failed to disclose their intentions. Here are stories from the WSJ and NYT. Click here for the opinion.

The flap concerned the way in which equity swaps are used by activist investors to build up positions in companies. As the NYT describes the product, one party — typically a brokerage — promises to pay the other — here, a hedge fund — all the economic rewards of owning a stock, and the fund promises to compensate the firm if the stock loses value. According to the NYT, swaps give the holder no voting rights and, in the view of the funds, mean they don’t need to comply with disclosure rules because, under securities laws, only “beneficial ownership” — meaning both voting rights and economic benefits — must be disclosed.

For Judge Kaplan, that was the rub. He said the funds sought to justify their actions “on the basis of formalistic arguments,” even when they had “defeated the purpose of the law.” He found that TCI and 3G used the swaps in a way that consciously allowed them to build a position while delaying such disclosure to the broader stock market. The swaps hung “like the sword of Damocles over the neck of CSX,” he wrote. Viewing those swaps as anything but regular shares owned outright, “failed to take account of the practical realities of the world,” and would “be open to the gravest abuse.” The funds reportedly own 8.7% of the company’s shares, and have positions in equity swaps that amount to another 12.3% of the shares.

However, Kaplan said that it was too late to reverse the funds’ actions, and that he was legally prevented from “sterilizing” or neutralizing their votes when shareholders choose a board of directors on June 25. Instead, the funds were permanently enjoined from making future violations.

Representing CSX were Cravath’s Rory O. Millson, Francis P. Barron and David R. Marriott. The Children’s Investment Fund was represented by Schulte Roth’s Howard O. Godnick, Michael E. Swartz and Yocheved Cohen. On 3G’s side were Kirkland & Ellis’s Peter Duffy Doyle and Andrew M. Genser.

Full post as published by Law Blog - WSJ.com on June 12, 2008 (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!






0.003 secs (from cache 10/31/26 05:28:19)