Shareholder Derivative

Robbins Geller performed ‘a commendable job of addressing the relevant issues with great detail and in a comprehensive manner … . The court respects the [Firm’s] experience in the field of derivative [litigation].’

Hon. Carlos Murguia, Alaska Electrical Pension Fund v. Olofson

Robbins Geller’s shareholder derivative and corporate governance practice is focused on preserving corporate assets and enhancing long-term shareowner value. Shareowner derivative actions are often brought by institutional investors to vindicate the rights of the corporation injured by its executives’ misconduct, which can effect violations of the nation’s securities, anti-corruption, false claims, cyber-security, labor, environment and/or health and safety laws. 

The Firm’s attorneys have aided its clients in significantly enhancing shareowner value by obtaining hundreds of millions of dollars in financial clawbacks and successfully negotiating corporate governance enhancement. Robbins Geller has worked with its institutional clients to address corporate misconduct such as options backdating, bribery of foreign officials, pollution, off-label marketing, and insider trading and related self-dealing. 

Robbins Geller’s significant achievements in shareholder derivative and corporate governance litigation include:

  • Loizides v. Schramm (Maxwell Technology Derivative Litigation), No. 37-2010-00097953 (Cal. Super. Ct., San Diego Cnty.). The Firm prosecuted this shareholder derivative claim arising from the company’s alleged violations of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act of 1977 (“FCPA”). As a result of Robbins Geller’s efforts, Maxwell insiders agreed to adopt significant changes in Maxwell’s internal controls and systems designed to protect Maxwell against future potential violations of the FCPA. These corporate governance changes included establishing the following, among other things: a compliance plan to improve board oversight of Maxwell’s compliance process and internal controls; a clear corporate policy prohibiting bribery and subcontracting kickbacks, whereby individuals are accountable; mandatory employee training requirements, including the comprehensive explanation of whistleblower provisions, to provide for confidential reporting of FCPA violations or other corruption; enhanced resources and internal control and compliance procedures for the audit committee to act quickly if an FCPA violation or other corruption is detected; an FCPA and Anti-Corruption Compliance department that has the authority and resources required to asses global operations and detect violations of the FCPA and other instances of corruption; a rigorous ethics and compliance program applicable to all directors, officers, and employees, designed to prevent and detect violations of the FCPA and other applicable anti-corruption laws; an executive-level position of Chief Compliance Officer with direct board-level reporting responsibilities, who shall be responsible for overseeing and managing compliance issues within the company; a rigorous insider trading policy buttressed by enhanced review and supervision mechanisms and a requirement that all trades are timely disclosed; and enhanced provisions requiring that business entities are only acquired after thorough FCPA and anti-corruption due diligence by legal, accounting, and compliance personnel at Maxwell.
  • In re SciClone Pharms., Inc. S’holder Derivative Litig., No. CIV 499030 (Cal. Super. Ct., San Mateo Cnty.). Robbins Geller attorneys successfully prosecuted the derivative claims on behalf of nominal party SciClonePharmaceuticals, Inc., resulting in the adoption of state-of-the-art corporate governance reforms. The corporate governance reforms included the establishment of an FCPA compliance coordinator; the adoption of an FCPA compliance program and code; and the adoption of additional internal controls and compliance functions.
  • Policemen & Firemen Ret. Sys. of the City of Detroit v. Cornelison (Halliburton Derivative Litigation), No. 2009-29987 (Tex. Dist. Ct., Harris Cnty.). The Firm prosecuted shareholder derivative claims on behalf of Halliburton Company against certain Halliburton insiders for breaches of fiduciary duty arising from Halliburton’s alleged violations of the FCPA. In the settlement, Halliburton agreed, among other things, to adopt strict intensive controls and systems designed to detect and deter the compensation clawback, director stock ownership requirements, a limitation on the number of other boards that Halliburton directors may serve, a lead director charter, enhanced director independence standards, and the creation of a management compliance committee. 
  • In re Fossil, Inc. Derivative Litig., No. 3:06-cv-10672 (N.D. Tex.). The settlement agreement included the following corporate governance changes: declassification of elected board members; retirement of three directors and addition of five new independent directors; two-thirds board independence requirements; corporate governance guidelines providing for “Majority Voting” election of directors; lead independent director requirements; revised accounting measurement dates of options; addition of standing finance committee; compensation clawbacks; director compensation standards; revised stock option plans and grant procedures; limited stock option granting authority, timing, and pricing; enhanced education and training; and audit engagement partner rotation and outside audit firm review.
  • Pirelli Armstrong Tire Corp. Retiree Med. Benefits Trust v. Sinegal (Costco Derivative Litigation), No. 2:08-cv-01450 (W.D. Wash.). The parties agreed to settlement terms providing for the following corporate governance changes: the amendment of Costco’s bylaws to provide “Majority Voting” election of directors; the elimination of overlapping compensation and audit committee membership on common subject matters; enhanced Dodd-Frank requirements; enhanced internal audit standards and control, and revised information-sharing procedures; revised compensation policies and procedures; revised stock option plans and grant procedures; limited stock option granting authority, timing, and pricing; and enhanced ethics compliance standards and training.
  • In re F5 Networks, Inc. Derivative Litig., No. C-06-0794 (W.D. Wash.). The parties agreed to the following corporate governance changes as part of the settlement: revised stock option plans and grant procedures; limited stock option granting authority, timing, and pricing; “Majority Voting” election of director perquisites; and revised compensation practices.
Main Menu