Equity-Linked Investors, L.P. v. Adams
1997 WL 225708, 1997 Del. Ch. LEXIS 64, 705 A.2d 1040 (1997)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
When a corporation is in the vicinity of insolvency, its board of directors does not breach its fiduciary duties by approving a transaction that continues the business for the potential benefit of common stockholders, even if it involves a change of control, without soliciting a bid from preferred stockholders whose financial interests favor immediate liquidation.
Facts:
- Genta Incorporated, a bio-pharmaceutical company with promising technology, had never been profitable and was on the verge of insolvency.
- The company had Series A preferred stock with a $30 million liquidation preference, which was believed to be greater than the company's total liquidation value, rendering the common stock worthless in a liquidation scenario.
- In 1996, Genta became unable to satisfy its contractual obligation to redeem the Series A preferred stock, leading to contentious negotiations with a committee of preferred stockholders, including Equity-Linked Investors, L.P.
- The preferred stockholders' committee consistently pushed for a restructuring plan that involved selling Genta's assets to generate cash to satisfy their liquidation preference, which would leave little to no value for the common stockholders.
- Genta's board, seeking to preserve potential long-term value for the common stock, publicly searched for new equity financing to continue operations and develop its technology.
- Negotiations with the preferred stockholders' committee broke down in January 1997 after they presented a final proposal that would have effectively dismantled the company.
- With only one week of operating cash remaining and bankruptcy imminent, Genta's board approved a financing transaction with a new investor, Aries.
- The Aries transaction provided a $3 million secured loan in exchange for notes and warrants that, if exercised, would grant Aries voting control of Genta. Aries expressed its intent to continue Genta's business operations.
Procedural Posture:
- Equity-Linked Investors, L.P., a holder of Genta's Series A preferred stock, filed a lawsuit against Genta, Inc. and its board in the Delaware Court of Chancery.
- The plaintiff sought an injunction or other equitable relief to block the financing transaction between Genta and Aries.
- The case proceeded to trial in the Court of Chancery.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does the board of directors of a nearly insolvent corporation breach its fiduciary duty to maximize shareholder value by approving a financing transaction that results in a change of control, without soliciting an alternative proposal from preferred stockholders whose interests are fundamentally adverse to the board's legitimate business plan of continuing the enterprise?
Opinions:
Majority - Chancellor Allen
No. The board of directors did not breach its fiduciary duty. Where the interests of common and preferred stockholders diverge, the board is entitled to exercise its good faith business judgment to prefer the long-term interests of the common stock over the liquidation interests of the preferred stock, provided it does not violate the preferred's contractual rights. The board's decision was a reasonable choice between two fundamentally different paths: financing a future for the company versus liquidating it. Soliciting a bid from the preferred stockholders would have been futile, as their known objective was to dismantle the company, a goal directly contrary to the board's legitimate business plan of preserving the enterprise to realize value for the common stock. Given the preferred's liquidation preference, they would have had a bidding advantage they could use to force liquidation, thereby destroying any potential upside for the common stockholders. The board acted in good faith, was well-informed of its limited alternatives in a desperate situation, and reasonably concluded that the Aries transaction was the only available option to achieve its business plan.
Analysis:
This case clarifies the scope of a board's fiduciary duties in the 'zone of insolvency' when the economic interests of different classes of shareholders are in direct conflict. It establishes that a board may prioritize the potential long-term value for residual claimants (common stockholders) over the contractually-defined preferences of another class (preferred stockholders), particularly when the latter's interests align with the company's liquidation. The decision provides judicial deference to a board's good-faith strategic choice to pursue a high-risk plan to save the company, creating a practical limitation on the Revlon duty to auction where soliciting bids from certain parties would be antithetical to maximizing value for the common stock.
