Case Page

 

Case Status:    DISMISSED    
On or around 07/07/2016 (Stipulation and order of dismissal (voluntary dismissal))

Filing Date: April 08, 2016

According to the Complaint, on February 9, 2016, ITC and Fortis issued a joint press release announcing that they had entered into an Agreement and Plan of Merger (the “Merger Agreement”) to sell ITC to Fortis. Under the terms of the Merger Agreement, Fortis will acquire all outstanding shares of ITC for the equivalent of $11.3 billion in stock and cash. Specifically, ITC shareholders will receive 0.7520 shares of Fortis stock and $22.57 per share in cash for each ITC share they own (the “Merger Consideration”). The Merger Consideration is valued at $44.90 per share
based on the February 8, 2016 Fortis closing price.

The Complaint alleges on March 17, 2016, Fortis filed a Registration Statement on Form F-4 (the “Registration Statement”) with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”). The Registration Statement, which recommends that ITC shareholders vote in favor of the Proposed Transaction, omits or misrepresents material information concerning, among other things: (i) the valuation analyses prepared by the Company’s financial advisors, in connection with the rendering of their fairness opinions; (ii) ITC and Fortis management’s projections, utilized in their financial analyses; and (iii) material information concerning the sale process leading up to the Proposed Transaction.

This case was voluntarily dismissed on July 7, 2016.

COMPANY INFORMATION:

Sector: Utilities
Industry: Electric Utilities
Headquarters: United States

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol: ITC
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.
COURT: E.D. Michigan
DOCKET #: 16-CV-11293
JUDGE: Hon. Arthur J. Tarnow
DATE FILED: 04/08/2016
CLASS PERIOD START: 02/09/2016
CLASS PERIOD END: 04/08/2016
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. WeissLaw LLP
    551 Fifth Avenue, Suite 1600, WeissLaw LLP, NY 10176
    212.682.3025 212.682-3010 · info@wllawny.com
  2. Wernette Heilman PLLC
    24725 W. 12 Mile Road Suite 110, Wernette Heilman PLLC, MI 48034
    (248) 663-5170 ·
No Document Title Filing Date