Case Page

 

Case Status:    DISMISSED    
On or around 08/18/2011 (Court's order of dismissal)

Filing Date: February 17, 2011

According to the complaint filed February 17, 2011, on January 27, 2011, Verizon and the Company announced a definitive agreement under which Verizon, through its wholly owned subsidiary, Verizon Holdings Inc. (“Merger Sub”), will commence a tender offer to acquire all of the outstanding shares of Terremark for $19.00 per share in cash. The Proposed Transaction is valued at $1.4 billion. Verizon commenced the tender offer on February 10, 2011, and it is currently scheduled to expire on March 10, 2011.

The Board has breached their fiduciary duties by agreeing to the Proposed Transaction for grossly inadequate consideration. As described in more detail below, given Terremark’s recent strong performance as well its future growth prospects and the expected growth of the cloud computing market, the consideration shareholders are to receive is inadequate and significantly undervalues the Company.

On April 11, 2011, the parties filed a Notice of Settlement, and the case was administratively closed pursuant to the settlement in state court.

On August 16. 2011, the Plaintiffs filed a Notice to Voluntarily Dismiss the case; and two days later the Court issued an Order Dismissing the case with prejudice.

COMPANY INFORMATION:

Sector: Services
Industry: Communications Services
Headquarters: United States

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol: TMRK
Company Market: NASDAQ
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.
COURT: S.D. Florida
DOCKET #: 11-CV-20555
JUDGE: Hon. Cecilia M. Altonaga
DATE FILED: 02/17/2011
CLASS PERIOD START: 01/27/2011
CLASS PERIOD END: 02/17/2011
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Law Office of Abe Shainberg
    132 East 43rd Street, Suite 512, Law Office of Abe Shainberg, NY 10017
    (212) 425-7286 ·
  2. Levi & Korsinsky LLP (DC)
    1101 30th Street, NW; Suite 115, Levi & Korsinsky LLP (DC), DC 20007
    ·
  3. Levi & Korsinsky, LLP
    30 Broad Street, 15 1h Floor, Levi & Korsinsky, LLP, NY 10004
    212.363.7500 212.363-7171 ·
  4. Vianale & Vianale LLP (Boca Raton)
    2499 Glades Road, Suite 112, Vianale & Vianale LLP (Boca Raton), FL 33431
    561.392.4750 561.392.4750 · info@vianalelaw.com
No Document Title Filing Date