Law360
Is ‘Peppercorn’ No Longer Sufficient To Settle M&A Suits?
August 13, 2015
In Acevedo v. Aeroflex Holding Corp. (Del. Ch. Jul. 8, 2015), the Delaware Court of Chancery intentionally departed from the long-developing trend of mergers and acquisitions litigation settlements based only on merger agreement modifications and/or supplemental disclosures. The case is related to the acquisition by Cobham PLC of Aeroflex Holding Corp. Vice Chancellor J. Travis Laster declined to approve a proposed settlement in a class action, finding that modifications to certain deal protections (e.g., reduction in breakup fee and change in matching rights period) and supplemental disclosures were not sufficiently beneficial to the class to warrant an “intergalactic release” of claims for the defendants.
Contacts
Capabilities
Suggested News & Insights
Recharge & Recaffeinate with Sidley @ JPMMonday, January 12, 2026 – Tuesday, January 13, 2026Biotech Dealmaking – Regulatory Considerations for the Next Wave of Development-Stage Transactions – Program and Lunch @ JPM 2026Monday, January 12, 2026Top Posts of 2025January 8, 2026Sidley Represented Bessemer Investors in Sale of Leonard Valve CompanyJanuary 7, 2026Bloomberg Ranks Sidley No. 1 for Shareholder Activism Defense for 6th Year in a Row With Record Number of CampaignsJanuary 5, 2026California Appellate Court Affirms Enforceability of Federal Forum Provisions in Securities Act LitigationDecember 17, 2025
- Stay Up To DateSubscribe to Sidley Publications
- Follow Sidley on Social MediaSocial Media Directory



