On or around 02/28/2011 (Court's order of dismissal)
Filing Date: September 16, 2010
According to the complaint filed on September 16, 2010, this action arises out of defendants' violations of state law and § 14(a) and §20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the "1934 Act") and U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission ("SEC") Rule l4a-9 promulgated thereunder in connection with their attempts to sell Dynegy via an unfair process to Blackstone for $4.50 per share (the "Proposed Acquisition").
In pursuing the unlawful plan to solicit shareholder approval oftheir proposed sale of Dynegy, each ofthe defendants violated applicable law by directly breaching and/or aiding other defendants' breaches oftheir fiduciary duties ofloyalty, due care, good faith and fair dealing. This action seeks to enjoin the Individual Defendants, as defined herein, from further breaching their fiduciary duties in their pursuit of a sale of the Company to Blackstone at an unfair price and following an unfair and self-serving process.
On January 18, 2011, the Court issued two orders dismissing four of the defendants from this action without prejudice.
On January 24, 2011, the Court issued an order to have the cases managed under the docket number 10-CV-3145. On February 28, pursuant to a Stipulation by the Parties, the Court dismissed this case.
Company & Securities Information
Defendant: Dynegy, Inc.
Industry: Electric Utilities
Headquarters: United States
Ticker Symbol: NCJH
Company Market: New York SE
Market Status: Public (Listed)
About the Company & Securities Data
"Company" information provides the industry and sector classification and headquarters state for the primary company-defendant in the litigation. In general, "Securities" information provides the ticker symbol, market, and market status for the underlying securities at issue in the litigation.
In most cases, the primary company-defendant actually issued the securities that are the subject of the litigation, and the securities information and company information relate to the same entity. In a small subset of cases, however, the primary company-defendant is not the issuer (for example, cases against third party brokers/dealers), and the securities information and company information do not relate to the same entity.