Myron R. Stahl v. Gibraltar Financial Corporation

Good Law
92 Daily Journal DAR 8208·967 F.2d 335·1992 WL 133319·1992 U.S. App. LEXIS 13784·92 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 5124
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 18, 199289-55943California1,737 words

Opinion

Opinion

Kozinski, J.

We consider whether a shareholder who receives false or misleading proxy statements must actually have cast his vote in reliance on them as a condition for bringing suit under section 14(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and SEC Rule 14a-9.

Facts

Myron Stahl owned stock in Gibraltar Financial Corporation; he received an invitation to the company’s 1987 annual meeting together with a proxy statement soliciting votes on several proposals for those shareholders unable to attend. One of these was a proposed amendment to the company’s certificate of incorporation, purportedly in response to recent changes in Delaware law, that would insulate Gibraltar’s directors from monetary liability. In connection with this proposal, the board of directors represented that it was “not aware of any pending or threatened litigation which would be affected by the approval of [the indemnity amendment].” Joint Proxy Statement/Prospectus at 26.

Stahl sued the corporation in an attempt to forestall the vote at the annual meeting. He alleged that the proxy statement “fails to disclose the existence of certain facts known by management to be relevant to the advisability of [the indemnity…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.