Mergers & Acquisitions Litigation

Mergers &
Acquisitions
Litigation

Our Mergers & Acquisitions Litigation Group handles a wide range of high-stakes disputes that arise in the M&A context, from shareholder litigation challenging corporate transactions, to battles related to hostile takeovers, corporate control and breach of contract allegations. Our track record in the most complex M&A disputes, including matters filed in multiple state and federal jurisdictions or under expedited discovery timetables, is unparalleled. Our Wilmington office, led by a former Chancellor of the Delaware Court of Chancery, gives our clients a powerful advantage in the nation's most influential forum for corporate law.

We advise clients throughout the transaction lifecycle, from the planning phase—where we assist in anticipating and avoiding potential litigation risks related to deal protection, disclosure obligations, conflicts of interest and executive compensation—to the pre-closing and post-closing phases, where we defend or enforce our clients’ rights and obligations. Our lawyers are particularly experienced in representing companies and their boards in deal termination disputes, shareholder class and derivative actions, appraisal rights actions, and Section 220 demands and actions, among others. We also regularly counsel executives, boards of directors, special committees and independent committees on fiduciary duties and other Delaware law aspects of corporate management.

Our lawyers have played leading roles in landmark M&A-related disputes in recent decades, both on the defense and plaintiffs’ side. In the Court of Chancery, we represented Fresenius in the first-ever ruling that a Material Adverse Effect (MAE) was justified based on post-signing financial decline and other factors. Shortly thereafter, we secured a decision compelling an acquirer to consummate a deal, the first such decision in an MAE case following the landmark Fresenius ruling. We previously represented a party in the seminal case defining a "tender offer" under the Williams Act; Revlon in the landmark 1986 Delaware Supreme Court decision that established so-called "Revlon duties" of directors; and Warner Communications in the 1990 Delaware opinion holding that stock-for-stock mergers do not trigger Revlon duties. We have also secured significant victories for clients in federal and state courts in preliminary injunction motions seeking to halt a transaction, post-close disclosure disputes, and conflicted controller claims.

Our clients benefit from our close collaboration with our corporate M&A team, which offers market-leading experience and perspective on a full range of deal-related issues, including those concerning takeover battles, corporate governance, shareholder activism, and director and officer responsibility. We also leverage the expertise of one the country's premier regulatory defense teams, bringing to bear effective representation across the lifetime of a transaction. 

“Phenomenal team, top to bottom. They are an incredible group that is worthy of handling sensitive and material matters. The team successfully achieves clients’ goals, first and foremost.”

- Legal 500 US

Recognition

Legal 500 US: Tier 1 in M&A Litigation: Defense

  • Named a leading firm in Chancery (DE) by Chambers USA
  • Law360: 2022 Delaware Regional Powerhouse
  • Five partners recognized as “Leading Lawyers” by Legal 500 US in M&A Litigation: Defense

Recent Engagements

  • Advance, a privately-owned investment company, and several current and former officers and directors in the settlement of a shareholder class action brought in the Delaware Court of Chancery asserting breach of fiduciary duty claims related to the $43 billion merger between AT&T’s WarnerMedia and Discovery Inc., which Advance founded and is a majority shareholder of.
  • The independent directors of former CBS Corp. in a shareholder class action brought in the Delaware Court of Chancery alleging breach of fiduciary duty claims, among others, relating to CBS Corp.’s multibillion-dollar stock-for-stock merger with Viacom Inc.
  • CDK Global, a leading automotive retail technology company, in securing the denial of a preliminary injunction motion seeking to halt its $8.3 billion merger with Brookfield Business Partners, Brookfield Asset Management’s flagship private equity vehicle. The court denied the motion for preliminary injunction just hours before the tender offer deadline, allowing for the consummation of the merger two days later.
  • Channel Medsystems, Inc., a medical device start-up, in a major trial victory in the Delaware Court of Chancery in a material adverse event litigation with Boston Scientific Corporation in which Boston Scientific unsuccessfully sought to terminate its $275 million acquisition of the company.
  • The Special Committee and additional independent directors of Expedia Group Inc. in a shareholder class action brought in the Delaware Court of Chancery alleging breach of fiduciary duty claims regarding the company’s $2.6 billion acquisition of Liberty Expedia Holdings.
  • Fresenius SE & Co., a German healthcare company, in a landmark ruling, affirmed by the Delaware Supreme Court, that Fresenius was justified in terminating a $4.8 billion merger agreement with Akorn Pharmaceuticals due to Akorn’s post-signing decline and Akorn’s blatant breaches of FDA data integrity requirements, both constituting Material Adverse Events (MAE) under Delaware law. The decision was the first to find an MAE justified based on post-signing financial decline and other factors.
  • LVMH in expedited litigation in the Delaware Court of Chancery concerning LVMH’s proposed $16.2 billion acquisition of luxury jeweler Tiffany & Co., asserting that a material adverse effect had occurred since the emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic. The parties settled prior to trial, with LVMH agreeing to purchase Tiffany at price below the initial per-share offer.
  • Nuance Communications, an American multinational computer software technology corporation, in securing the dismissal of a merger disclosure lawsuit and related motion for attorneys’ fees—a vanishingly rare outcome—brought in connection with Microsoft’s $19.7 billion acquisition of the company.
  • Pilot Travel Centers (PTC), an owner and operator of travel centers across the United States intended to serve the trucking industry, in the favorable resolution on the eve of trial of a breach of contract and fiduciary duty action filed in the Delaware Court of Chancery by Pilot Corporation, a minority member of PTC, against PTC, Berkshire Hathaway, the majority members of PTC, and certain PTC board members. Plaintiff alleged that PTC breached the LLC agreement, and that Berkshire and the board defendants breached their fiduciary duties by imposing pushdown accounting on PTC’s financial statements, which artificially reduced PTC’s earnings and devalued Pilot Corporation’s put right to sell its remaining 20% interest in PTC to Berkshire.
  • The former members of the Special Committee of the Board of Directors of Pattern Energy Group Inc., a California-based independent power company, in the successful resolution of two separate shareholder class actions brought in the Delaware Court of Chancery and in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware, asserting breach of fiduciary duty claims related to Pattern Energy’s $6.1 billion merger agreement with Canada Pension Plan Investment Board (CPPIB).
  • The Special Committee of the Board of Directors of QAD Inc., a leading provider of cloud-based enterprise software solutions, in defeating a stockholder’s preliminary injunction motion brought in the Delaware Court of Chancery seeking to block a shareholder vote on QAD’s $2 billion merger with private equity firm Thoma Bravo. The ruling, which followed a highly contested hearing and expedited discovery, allowed for the transaction to proceed to a shareholder vote and the sale was completed shortly thereafter. The parties entered into a global settlement to resolve the litigation in May 2023.
  • Simon Property Group in expedited litigation concerning Simon’s suit to terminate its proposed $3.6 billion acquisition of a majority of Taubman Realty Group due to an alleged COVID-19-related material adverse change. The parties settled on the eve of trial, resulting in an $800 million purchase price reduction—the biggest COVID-19 related discount to date for a major deal.
  • Symbiont.io, Inc., a blockchain-powered "smart securities" startup, in a trial victory in Delaware Court of Chancery in connection with its lawsuit against Ipreo Holdings and IHS Markit which arose out of the defendants’ bad-faith efforts to undermine a joint venture between Symbiont and Ipreo intended to leverage blockchain technology in the syndicated loan market. The Court issued a verdict awarding more than $140 million to the joint venture entity—one of the largest damages awards in recent years in Chancery Court.
  • Virtu Financial, a leading high-frequency trading firm, in the successful resolution of a preliminary injunction brought under Section 202 of the Delaware Corporation Law challenging Virtu’s $1.4 billion acquisition of Knight Capital Group. Paul, Weiss subsequently negotiated the favorable settlement of a stockholder class action in the Delaware Court of Chancery alleging breach of fiduciary duty and disclosure-related claims concerning the same transaction.