Longman v. Food Lion, Inc.
197 F.3d 675 (1999)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
A company does not commit securities fraud under Rule 10b-5 for failing to disclose negative information that has already been made publicly available by other sources. Furthermore, general, optimistic corporate statements that amount to non-quantifiable 'puffery' are not actionable as material misrepresentations, nor is a company required to disclose isolated instances of mismanagement that are not material to the company's overall financial condition.
Facts:
- Between May 1990 and November 1992, Food Lion, Inc., a large grocery chain, issued public statements and annual reports praising its employee relations, store cleanliness, and operating efficiencies.
- During this same period, the United Food and Commercial Workers Union (UFCW) was engaged in a public effort to organize Food Lion's employees.
- On September 11, 1991, the UFCW publicly announced it had filed a complaint with the Department of Labor, alleging that Food Lion's profits were artificially inflated due to widespread 'off-the-clock' work violations.
- Food Lion responded with press releases denying the UFCW's allegations, stating it had a clear policy against off-the-clock work and characterizing the union's complaint as a harassment tactic.
- Food Lion utilized a labor management system called 'Effective Scheduling,' which plaintiffs alleged pressured employees into working unpaid hours and cutting corners on sanitation to meet performance goals.
- On November 5, 1992, the ABC television program 'Prime Time Live' broadcast an exposé on Food Lion, featuring hidden camera footage from three stores and interviews with former employees alleging unsanitary food handling practices and illegal off-the-clock work.
- The day after the 'Prime Time Live' broadcast, the price of Food Lion's stock fell by approximately 11-14%.
- In August 1993, Food Lion settled the Department of Labor claims for $16.2 million, an amount financial experts for both parties agreed was not material to the company's earnings.
Procedural Posture:
- David Longman and other stockholders (Plaintiffs) filed two class-action lawsuits against Food Lion, Inc. and its CEO, Tom E. Smith (Defendants), in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina.
- The district court consolidated the two actions.
- Plaintiffs alleged that Defendants committed securities fraud in violation of § 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and SEC Rule 10b-5.
- Defendants filed a motion for summary judgment to dismiss the case.
- The district court granted summary judgment in favor of the Defendants, dismissing all of the Plaintiffs' claims.
- The Plaintiffs (Appellants) appealed the district court's grant of summary judgment to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit.
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 a company commit securities fraud under Rule 10b-5 by making positive public statements about its operations while failing to disclose alleged widespread labor law violations and unsanitary practices, when information about the labor claims was already public and the sanitation issues were isolated?
Opinions:
Majority - Niemeyer, J.
No. A company's failure to disclose such information does not constitute securities fraud. Regarding the labor law violations, the claims were not a material omission because the UFCW had already publicly disclosed the allegations more than a year before the 'Prime Time Live' broadcast. Citing Raab v. General Physics Corp., the court reasoned that the market is presumed to have internalized all publicly available information, so the broadcast added no new material facts regarding the off-the-clock claims. Further, the eventual settlement was financially immaterial. Regarding the unsanitary practices, Food Lion's statements about store cleanliness were non-actionable 'puffery' that a reasonable investor would not rely upon. The evidence of unsanitary conditions presented in the broadcast was limited to a few of Food Lion's 1,000 stores and represented isolated, day-to-day operational problems, not a systemic issue material to the company's overall value that required disclosure.
Dissenting - Murnaghan, J.
Yes, a genuine issue of material fact exists as to whether Food Lion committed securities fraud. The majority misapplies the 'truth-on-the-market' defense, which requires that information be 'credibly available to the market by other sources.' The source of the labor violation information was the UFCW, an admitted adversary engaged in a bitter dispute with Food Lion. The market would likely discount allegations from such a biased source, especially when Food Lion was vehemently denying them. Therefore, the 'Prime Time Live' broadcast may have been the first credible disclosure of these problems to the market, making Food Lion's prior omissions and denials material. Because a dispute of fact exists as to the credibility of the prior disclosures, summary judgment was inappropriate and the case should have proceeded to a jury.
Analysis:
This case significantly reinforces the 'truth-on-the-market' defense, clarifying that information in the public domain, even from a biased source and denied by the company, can render a company's omission immaterial. It also strengthens the 'puffery' defense, providing companies with substantial latitude to make general, optimistic statements about their business without incurring securities fraud liability. The ruling distinguishes between isolated operational failures and systemic, material problems, establishing that companies are not required under federal securities laws to disclose every instance of localized mismanagement.
