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
Sidley Represents NextCure in Merger With Avere Therapeutics and Concurrent US$320 Million Private PlacementJuly 17, 2026Sidley Finishes H1 2026 Among Top Three US$1B+ Dealmakers in TexasJuly 16, 2026European Commission Signals Targeted Procedural Simplification of the Foreign Subsidies Regulation – Without Weakening EnforcementJuly 16, 2026Inspection Rights, Internal Affairs, and Personal Jurisdiction: Orchid Global’s Procedural LessonJuly 15, 2026Sidley Advises EMZ Partners on Its Significant Minority Investment in Steinbach & VollmannJuly 13, 2026Sidley Represents Sino Biopharm in an Exclusive License Agreement With AstraZenecaJuly 13, 2026
- Stay Up To DateSubscribe to Sidley Publications
- Follow Sidley on Social MediaSocial Media Directory



