Case Page

 

Case Status:    DISMISSED    
On or around 11/05/2014 (Court's order of dismissal)

Filing Date: May 09, 2014

According to the Complaint, on March 17, 2014, Hastings announced that it had entered into a definitive agreement and plan of merger ("Merger Agreement") under which the Buyout Group would acquire all of the outstanding, publicly-held common shares of Hastings. Under the terms of the transaction, Hastings shareholders will receive $3.00 in cash for each Hastings share they own.

On April 22, 2014, Hastings filed a preliminary proxy statement on Schedule 14A with the SEC ("Preliminary Proxy"). The Preliminary Proxy is intended to solicit shareholder votes in connection with the Proposed Transaction.

The Complaint alleges that in violation of Section 14 of the Exchange Act, the Preliminary Proxy contains a number of material omissions concerning, among other things: (a) the background of the transaction; (b) key management projections; (c) the financial analysis of Hastings' financial advisor, SunTrust Robinson Humphrey, Inc. ("STRFI"); (d) potential conflicts of interest of STRH; and (e) potential conflicts of interest of George K. Baum Capital Advisors, Inc. ("Baum") Hastings' second financial advisor. It is critical that Hastings' public shareholders receive complete and accurate information about the Proposed Transaction in order to enable them to decide whether to vote in favor of the Proposed Transaction.

On November 3, 2014, the Plaintiff filed a Notice voluntarily dismissing this case. The Court issued an Order of dismissal 2 days later.

COMPANY INFORMATION:

Sector: Services
Industry: Personal Services
Headquarters: United States

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol: HAST
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: N.D. Texas
DOCKET #: 14-CV-00114
JUDGE: Hon. Mary Lou Robinson
DATE FILED: 05/09/2014
CLASS PERIOD START: 03/17/2014
CLASS PERIOD END: 05/09/2014
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Brower Piven (New York)
    488 Madison Avenue. Eighth Floor, Brower Piven (New York), NY 10022
    212.501.9000 212.501.0300 · info@browerpiven.com
  2. Puls Haney, P.L.L.C.
    300 Burnett Street, Ste. 160, Puls Haney, P.L.L.C., TX 76102
    817.338.1717 817.332.1333 ·
No Document Title Filing Date