Date post: | 28-Nov-2014 |
Category: |
Documents |
Upload: | rebecca-blabolil |
View: | 166 times |
Download: | 0 times |
STATE LAW CONSIDERATIONS
NEGOTIATION AND DOCUMENTATIONOF MERGER & ACQUISITION TRANSACTIONS
Spring Semester 2011
STATE LAW CONSIDERATIONS
2
AGENDABackgroundMergersAsset AcquisitionsSale of All or Substantially All AssetsStock AcquisitionsOther Transaction StructuresCases and DoctrinesTransfers of Assets and LiabilitiesState Regulation of TakeoversPlayers and Transactions
STATE LAW CONSIDERATIONS
3
BACKGROUND
Corporations are creatures of the state – only possess powers granted by state
Certificate of incorporation (COI) [MBCA – articles of incorporation] – corporation’s contract with its stockholders
Stockholders (S/H) [MBCA – shareholders] – act with respect to fundamental changes to corporation, but not directly with respect to management of corporation
Board of Directors (BOD) – representatives of s/h – manage and direct business and affairs of corporation (DGCL 141; MBCA 8.01) – fiduciary duties of care, loyalty and good faith• Business Judgment Rule – judicial deference to BOD actions –
presumption that BOD acts in best interests of corporation and its s/h absent fraud, illegality or self-dealing
Officers – generally manage day to day operations of the corporation – fiduciary duties
Corporate Formalities – statutory procedures required to validly consummate a transaction – must find statutory authority for transaction and must follow required procedures
STATE LAW CONSIDERATIONS
4
MERGERS
DGCL 251 [compare MBCA 11.02, 11.04, 11.06 and 11.07]
Merge (surviving corporation) or Consolidate (resulting corporation)
MBCA – no distinction between merger and consolidation [“survivor” may be the party to merger that survives or a new entity resulting from the merger]
STATE LAW CONSIDERATIONS
5
MERGERS
BOD approval [manage/direct business and affairs of corporation] by each corporation to merger or consolidation (constituent corporation [MBCA – party to a merger])
STATE LAW CONSIDERATIONS
6
MERGERS
S/H approval [fundamental change] by stockholders of constituent corporations• Majority of outstanding stock (unless greater vote
required by COI)• No class voting (unless required by COI) – DGCL
251(c), 102(a)(4) and 151(a) (but contrast with DGCL 242(b)(1)) – VantagePoint Venture Partners 1996 v Examen, Inc.
• Notice at least 20 days prior to meeting (see also DGCL 222)
Small Scale Merger Exception - No s/h approval required from s/h of surviving corporation if:• No change to corporation’s COI;• No change in outstanding or treasury stock; and• No stock (or securities convertible into stock) issued or
stock issued does not exceed 20% of outstanding stock immediately prior to merger (must have unissued or treasury stock available)
STATE LAW CONSIDERATIONS
7
MERGERS
Consideration• Stock or securities of surviving or
resulting corporation• Cash, property or rights• Securities of any other corporation or
entity
STATE LAW CONSIDERATIONS
8
MERGERS
Agreement of Merger (or Consolidation) [MBCA – plan of merger]• Terms and conditions• Mode of effecting transaction• Statement of no change, or set forth
amendments, to surviving corporation’s COI or attach COI for resulting corporation
• Manner of converting stock into merger consideration
• Other provisionsCertificate of Merger (or Consolidation)
[MBCA – articles of merger] – summary document filed with Secretary of State
STATE LAW CONSIDERATIONS
9
MERGERS
Consequences (DGCL 259 [compare MBCA 11.07]) – By operation of law:•Constituent corporations (other
than surviving corporation) cease to exist
•All rights, assets, liabilities and obligations of constituent corporations vest in and attach to surviving or resulting corporation
STATE LAW CONSIDERATIONS
10
MERGERS
Short Form Merger or Parent-Sub Merger Exception (DGCL 253 [compare MBCA 11.05]) – Corporation (parent corporation) owning 90% of stock of another corporation (subsidiary) may merge subsidiary into parent (upstream merger) or merge parent into subsidiary (downstream merger)• Merely need parent BOD resolution, except that if
Subsidiary not wholly-owned by parent – resolution must state terms and conditions (including consideration to subsidiary minority s/h); appraisal rights for subsidiary minority s/h and heightened standard (entire fairness test) for parent BOD fiduciary duties
Subsidiary is surviving corporation – parent s/h approval and pro rata issuance of stock in surviving corporation to parent s/h
STATE LAW CONSIDERATIONS
11
MERGERS
Short Form Merger•Entire (or Inherent) Fairness Test
If BOD (or individual directors) are on both sides of transaction, must demonstrate utmost good faith and inherent fairness of transaction
Requires both fair dealing and fair price (entire fairness) analyzed as a whole (not bifurcated analysis)
See Weinberger v UOP, Inc. (p. 159)
STATE LAW CONSIDERATIONS
12
MERGERS
Appraisal Rights (DGCL 262 [compare MBCA Chapter 13]) – right to determination by court of fair market value (FMV) of stock of constituent corporation – FMV excludes value resulting from transaction or expectation of transaction• Available w/r/t any class or series of stock of
constituent corporations• Notice by corporation to s/h at least 20 days
prior to meeting (if s/h vote) or prior to or within 10 days after effective date (if no s/h vote)
• S/H make demand prior to meeting (if s/h vote) or within 20 days after notice (if no s/h vote)
• S/H not vote in favor and continuously hold stock through effective date
STATE LAW CONSIDERATIONS
13
MERGERS
No Appraisal Rights – Exceptions• Market Out Exception – Stock listed on
national securities exchange or held by more than 2,000 holders
• Stock of surviving corporation if under DGCL 251(f) no approval of surviving corporation s/h required
Exception to Exceptions – appraisal rights available if s/h required to accept anything other than:• Stock of surviving or resulting corporation• Stock of any other corporation listed on
national securities exchange or held by more than 2,000 holders
• Cash in lieu of fractional shares
STATE LAW CONSIDERATIONS
14
MERGERS
Merger or Consolidation with Foreign Corporation (DGCL 252)
Merger or Consolidation with Partnership (DGCL 263)
Merger or Consolidation with LLC (DGCL 264)
MBCA addresses all in 11.02
STATE LAW CONSIDERATIONS
15
MERGERS
Typical Uses• Acquisition of Public Company• Acquisition of Private Company with
Numerous Stockholders
STATE LAW CONSIDERATIONS
16
MERGERS
Advantages• Ability to Purchase Entire Equity of Target
without Agreement of all Stockholders• Fewer Consent and Approval Issues than
with Asset Purchase• From Seller’s Perspective, Liabilities Remain
with TargetDisadvantages
• From Buyer’s Perspective, Additional Due Diligence Responsibility Associated with Possible Liabilities of Target
• Timing for Obtaining Stockholder Approval• Dissenters Rights
STATE LAW CONSIDERATIONS
17
ASSET ACQUISITIONS
No Buyer S/H Approval (no fundamental change) – DGCL 122(4) permits buyer to purchase or otherwise acquire real and personal property and DGCL 122 (13) permits buyer to assume liabilities [Compare MBCA 3.02(4) and (7)]• Buyer BOD approval depends upon materiality
of transaction and company policies No Seller S/H Approval if not sale of all or
substantially all assets (no fundamental change) – DGCL 122(4) permits corporation to sell or otherwise dispose of real and personal property [Compare MBCA 12.01 and 3.02(5)]• Seller BOD approval depends upon materiality
of transaction and company policies
STATE LAW CONSIDERATIONS
18
ASSET ACQUISITIONS
Sale of All or Substantially All Assets (DGCL 271 [Compare MBCA 12.2 “leave a corporation without a significant continuing business activity” and safe harbor])• Seller BOD approval (manage/direct business and
affairs of corporation)• S/H approval (fundamental change) – except sale to
wholly-owned subsidiary Majority of outstanding stock (unless greater vote
required by COI) Notice at least 20 days prior to meeting No appraisal rights (unless required by COI)
• Consideration – money or other property, including stock or securities of another corporation Buyer issuance of stock (to extent that unissued
or treasury stock available) and debt authorized by DCGL 152, 161 and 122(13) [Compare MBCA 6.21(b) and 3.02(7)]
STATE LAW CONSIDERATIONS
19
ASSET ACQUISITIONS
Consequences• Specified assets transferred to Buyer and
specified liabilities assumed by Buyer, all pursuant to instruments and documents of transfer, assignment, conveyance and assumptions
• Seller continues to exist holding transaction consideration and assets not transferred to and liabilities not assumed by Buyer
• Seller may or may not distribute transaction consideration to s/h
• Seller may or may not liquidate and dissolve pursuant to DCGL 275 [Compare MBCA 14.02]
STATE LAW CONSIDERATIONS
20
ASSET ACQUISITIONS
Typical Uses•Purchase of Division•Purchase of Business having
Substantial Contingent Liabilities•Purchase of Business where
Assets are in more than One Entity
STATE LAW CONSIDERATIONS
21
ASSET ACQUISITIONS
Advantages• Ability to Target Specific Assets• No Buyer Stockholder Vote• From Buyer’s Perspective, Ability to Avoid
Taking Unwanted Liabilities (but consider successor liability theories)
Disadvantages• Requirements for Consents and Approvals• Transfer and Assignment Documentation• Identification of Assets and Liabilities• From Seller’s Perspective, Retention of
Target Liabilities
STATE LAW CONSIDERATIONS
22
SALE OF ALL OR SUBSTANTIALLY ALL ASSETS
Gimbel v The Signal Companies, Inc.• Sale of assets quantitatively vital to operation of
corporation and [qualitatively] is out of the ordinary and substantially affect existence and purpose of corporation
Katz v Bregman• Sale of approximately 50% or more of corporation
assets constitutes sale of “substantially all assets”????
Hollinger Inc. v Hollinger Intl., Inc.• Rejects “approximately half” test• Qualitative test addresses the rational economic
expectations of corporation’s s/h Does transaction leave s/h with an investment that is
qualitatively different than they had before the transaction (i.e., does it “strike at the heart” of corporate existence”)?
STATE LAW CONSIDERATIONS
23
SALE OF ALL OR SUBSTANTIALLY ALL ASSETS
Contrast MBCA• Test
Disposition that leaves corporation without significant continuing business activity
• Safe Harbor/Bright Line Test Retention of at least 25% of total assets and
25% of either EBIT or revenues conclusively deemed retention of significant continuing business activity (MBCA 12.02(a))
STATE LAW CONSIDERATIONS
24
STOCK ACQUISITIONS Agreement with S/H (not Target)
• No target BOD approval• No target s/h vote
No Buyer S/H Approval (no fundamental change) – DGCL 123 permits buyer to purchase or otherwise acquire and own securities of another corporation and DGCL 122 (10) and (11) permit buyer to participate in, manage and control another corporation [Compare MBCA 3.02(6)]• Buyer BOD approval depends upon materiality
of transaction and company policies Consideration may be anything
• Buyer issuance of stock (to extent that unissued or treasury stock available) and debt authorized by DCGL 152 , 161 and 122(13) [Compare MBCA 6.21(b) and 3.02(7)]
STATE LAW CONSIDERATIONS
25
STOCK ACQUISITIONSConsequences
•Change of Control of Target – control transferred from target s/h to buyer
•Target continues to exist as a subsidiary of buyer holding its pre-transaction assets and liabilities
•Buyer insulated from target liabilities
STATE LAW CONSIDERATIONS
26
STOCK ACQUISITIONS
Typical Uses•Purchase of Wholly-Owned
Subsidiary•Purchase of Closely-Held Business•Purchase of less than 100% of
Target
STATE LAW CONSIDERATIONS
27
STOCK ACQUISITIONS
Advantages• Relative Ease of Execution• No Buyer Stockholder Vote• No Target Board Approval• Fewer Consent and Approval Issues than
with Asset Purchase• From Buyer’s Perspective, Liabilities Isolated
in SubsidiaryDisadvantages
• Need Agreement of all Target Stockholders• From Buyer’s Perspective, Additional Due
Diligence Responsibility Associated with Possible Liabilities of Target
STATE LAW CONSIDERATIONS
28
OTHER TRANSACTION STRUCTURES Triangular (or Subsidiary) Merger – merger
between newly formed subsidiary of buyer (Newco) and target (buyer is not a constituent corporation)• Forward – Newco survives• Reverse – Target survives• Consideration – cash, property or other
rights; stock or securities of surviving corporation; or securities of another corporation
• Consequence – assets and liabilities of Target held in subsidiary of buyer
STATE LAW CONSIDERATIONS
29
OTHER TRANSACTION STRUCTURESTriangular (or Subsidiary) Merger (cont.)
• Typical Uses Acquisition of Public Company Acquisition of Private Company with
Numerous Stockholders
STATE LAW CONSIDERATIONS
30
OTHER TRANSACTION STRUCTURES Triangular (or Subsidiary) Merger (cont.)
• Advantages Ability to Purchase Entire Equity of Target without
Agreement of all Stockholders No Buyer Stockholder Vote Fewer Consent and Approval Issues than with
Asset Purchase From Buyer’s Perspective, Liabilities Isolated in
Subsidiary
• Disadvantages From Buyer’s Perspective, Additional Due
Diligence Responsibility Associated with Possible Liabilities of Target
Timing for Obtaining Target Stockholder Approval Target Stockholder Dissenters Rights
STATE LAW CONSIDERATIONS
31
OTHER TRANSACTION STRUCTURES Two-Step Acquisition
• Stock Purchase (tender offer in public company context) – buyer purchases sufficient stock from target s/h to assure s/h approval of subsequent merger transaction – followed by
• Freeze-Out (or Squeeze-Out) Merger – second step merger of target with buyer or newco
Entire Fairness Test Must demonstrate utmost good faith and inherent
fairness of transaction Requires both fair dealing and fair price (entire
fairness) analyzed as a whole (not bifurcated analysis)
STATE LAW CONSIDERATIONS
32
OTHER TRANSACTION STRUCTURESTwo-Step Acquisition (cont.)
• Typical Uses Acquisition of Public Company
(particularly unsolicited bids) Acquisition of Private Company with
Dissident Stockholders
STATE LAW CONSIDERATIONS
33
OTHER TRANSACTION STRUCTURES Two-Step Acquisition (cont.)
• Advantages Ability to Purchase Entire Equity of Target without
Agreement of all Stockholders Relative Ease of Execution of First Step to Gain
Control of Target No Target Board Approval No Buyer Stockholder Vote Fewer Consent and Approval Issues than with
Asset Purchase From Buyer’s Perspective, Liabilities Isolated in
Subsidiary• Disadvantages
Time Required to Complete Both Steps Complexity Associated with Completing Two
Transactions
STATE LAW CONSIDERATIONS
34
Asset Purchase
MergerBuyer
(including Target’sassets and liabilities)
STATE LAW CONSIDERATIONS
35
Stock Purchase
Reverse Triangular (or Subsidiary) Merger
MBCA Mandatory Stock Exchange
Buyer
Target
STATE LAW CONSIDERATIONS
36
Forward Triangular (or Subsidiary) Merger
Triangular Asset Purchase
Buyer
Newco(including Target’s
assets and liabilities)
STATE LAW CONSIDERATIONS
37
CASES AND DOCTRINES De Facto Merger Doctrine – Equity principle of
substance over form• Transactions that have same substantive
effect should have same legal safeguards• Applestein v United Board & Carton
Corporation• Irving Bank Corp. v Bank of New York Co.
Doctrine of Independent Legal Significance – form over substance (no de facto merger)• Action taken under one section of DGCL is
legally independent and its validity is not dependent upon or judged against any other provision under which same result might be obtained by different means
• Hariton v Arco Electronics, Inc.• Rauch v RCA Corp.
STATE LAW CONSIDERATIONS
38
CASES AND DOCTRINES
Internal Affairs Doctrine – choice of law concept• Law of state of incorporation governs
internal affairs of a corporation• VantagePoint Venture Partners 1996 v
Examen, Inc.
Contract Construction Case• Pasternak v Glazer
STATE LAW CONSIDERATIONS
39
TRANSFER OF ASSETS AND LIABILITIES
Generally Transfer of Contractual Rights Successor Liability in Asset Acquisitions Liability of Seller’s S/H in Asset Acquisitions
STATE LAW CONSIDERATIONS
40
TRANSFER OF ASSETS AND LIABILITIES
Generally• Merger or Consolidation
Surviving or resulting corporation succeeds to all assets and liabilities of constituent corporations and the assets of all constituent corporations are available to satisfy creditors of all constituent corporations
• Asset Acquisition Buyer acquires only specified assets and assumes only
specified liabilities of seller• Stock Acquisition
Target assets and liabilities remain in target separate from assets and liabilities of buyer (unless, in the case of liabilities, conditions exist for piercing of corporate veil)
STATE LAW CONSIDERATIONS
41
TRANSFER OF ASSETS AND LIABILITIES
Transfer of Contractual Rights• Merger or Consolidation
Surviving or resulting corporation succeeds to all contractual rights of constituent corporations (including rights under contracts with anti-assignment clause), except that, without consent of contract counterpart, will not succeed to rights under:
Contracts with change of control clause if merger or consolidation results in a change of control of constituent corporation
Patent licenses (at least in Sixth Circuit) – PPG Industries, Inc. v. Guardian Industries
Contracts that are fully performed at time of merger or consolidation [or parties did not intend for surviving or resulting corporation to succeed to rights] – Mesa Partners v. Phillips Petroleum Co.
STATE LAW CONSIDERATIONS
42
TRANSFER OF ASSETS AND LIABILITIES
Transfer of Contractual Rights• Asset Acquisition
Buyer does not succeed to contractual rights under any contract with an anti-assignment clause, unless it obtains consent of contract counterpart
If contact is silent with respect to assignment, follow normal contract rules
Assignment of personal services contracts require consent of contract counterpart
Non-personal services contracts may be assigned without consent
• Stock Acquisition Contracts that are silent or contain anti-assignment
clause remain in effect – Branmar Theatre Co. v. Branmar, Inc.
Contracts containing change of control clauses require consent of contract counterpart to remain in effect
STATE LAW CONSIDERATIONS
43
TRANSFER OF ASSETS AND LIABILITIES
Successor Liability in Asset Acquisitions• Express Assumption• De Facto Merger• Mere Continuation• Fraudulent Purpose• Product Line Exception
STATE LAW CONSIDERATIONS
44
TRANSFER OF ASSETS AND LIABILITIES
Successor Liability in Asset Acquisitions• De Facto Merger
Continuation of enterprise – continuity of management, personnel, location, etc.
Continuity of S/H (S/H of seller become S/H of buyer) Seller ceases operations and dissolves Buyer assumes liabilities and obligations necessary for
uninterrupted operations of seller’s business
• Mere Continuation Reincarnation of seller Same elements as de facto merger, except buyer and
seller have identical S/H
• Bud Antle, Inc. v. Eastern Foods, Inc.
STATE LAW CONSIDERATIONS
45
TRANSFER OF ASSETS AND LIABILITIES
Successor Liability in Asset Acquisitions• Product Line Exception – assumption of
products liability (strict tort liability) Purchase of manufacturing business Continue to produce/sell seller’s line of products Plaintiff lacks adequate remedy Buyer knows about product risk associated with
line of products Buyer acquires goodwill associated with product
line
• Ruiz v. Blentech Corporation – Corporate law concept or tort law concept?
STATE LAW CONSIDERATIONS
46
TRANSFER OF ASSETS AND LIABILITIES
Successor Liability in Asset Acquisitions• Other Areas of Potential Successor Liability
Employment-related matters Environmental matters Certain tax liabilities Bulk sales
Requires buyer to give seller’s creditors advance notice of buyer’s purchase of seller’s stock in trade (inventory) without assumption of seller’s liabilities
STATE LAW CONSIDERATIONS
47
TRANSFER OF ASSETS AND LIABILITIES
Liability of Seller’s S/H in Asset Acquisitions• No change of position vis-à-vis seller’s liability if
seller continues to exist (unless conditions exist for piercing of corporate veil)
• If seller dissolved and makes distributions in compliance with DGCL 281 (distribution provisions) S/H liability limited to : Lesser of (i) distribution received by S/H and (ii) S/H pro
rata share of claim; and Claims brought within three years after dissolution, if
seller elects and complies with DGCL 280 (notice to claimants provisions)
Written notice to persons with known claims Published notice Petition court to determine amount and security sufficient for
(i) pending lawsuits, (ii) contingent or conditional contractual claims and (iii) unknown claims
STATE LAW CONSIDERATIONS
48
STATE REGULATION OF TAKEOVERS
First Generation – Disclosure and Fairness Statutes• Example – Illinois Business Take-Over Act
Takeover offer must be registered State Registered 20 days after filing with State unless
hearing initiated by State or requested by target State may deny registration if State determines
(a) registration does not provide full and fair disclosure or (b) or the offer is inequitable
• Held Invalid under the Commerce Clause (imposes a substantial burden on interstate commerce that outweighs local benefits) – Edgar v. MITE Corp. (1982)
STATE LAW CONSIDERATIONS
49
STATE REGULATION OF TAKEOVERS
Control Share Statutes• Prohibit person acquiring “control shares”
without the prior approval of a target’s BOD from voting such shares unless the holders of a majority of the “disinterested shares” agree to restore the vote of the control shares
• Upheld in CTS Corp. v. Dynamics Corp. of America (1987)
Fair or Best Price Statutes• Requires bidder not approved by target’s
BOD to pay all target S/H the best price paid to any target S/H
STATE LAW CONSIDERATIONS
50
STATE REGULATION OF TAKEOVERS
Business Combination Statutes• Prohibits “business combination” with an
“interested stockholder” for a specified period of time unless: Business combination approved by BOD in place
before S/H became an interested stockholder; or At time S/H became an interested stockholder,
S/H acquired at least a specified (usually very high) percentage of target’s voting stock; or
Business combination approved by both target’s BOD and by the holders (other than the interested stockholder) of a supermajority of target’s voting stock
• Example – DGCL 203
STATE LAW CONSIDERATIONS
51
Questions