Home | Cases | Institutional Investor Services | News & Events | Publications | FAQs | Offices | Careers | Careers | Contact Us | Search

Our Firm Our People Our Practice Areas Our Results
Current Cases

Recent Settlements

Securities Fraud,
Corporate Governance
and Shareholder Rights
Recoveries


Employment Discrimination
and Civil Rights Recoveries


Consumer and Fair Trade Protection Recoveries

In re Activision, Inc. Shareholder Derivative Litigation
(Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles)

Shareholder derivative action filed on behalf of Amalgamated Bank as Trustee of the LongView 400 Index Fund Retirement Trusts (“Amalgamated Bank”) brought for the benefit of Nominal Defendant Activision, Inc. ("Activision"), against certain current and former executive officers and directors of Activision. This action arises from defendants' obtaining, approving or acquiescing to the backdating of stock option grants in violation of their fiduciary duties and other laws between April 1995 and April 2003 (the "Relevant Period"), causing damage to Activision.

On August 3, 2006, Plaintiff filed a Derivative Complaint in the Superior Court of the State of California, County of Los Angeles, against John T. Baker, IV, Harold A. Brown, William J. Chardavoyne, Robert J. Dewar, Ronald Doornink, Lawrence Goldberg, Kenneth L. Henderson, Barbara S. Isur, Brian G. Kelly, Robert A. Kotick, Mitchell H. Lasky, Howard E. Marks, Steven T. Mayer, Robert J. Morgado, Barry J. Plaga, Michael J. Rowe, Richard A. Steele, Kathy Vrabeck, and Activision. The Complaint alleges breach of fiduciary duty, aiding and abetting a breach of fiduciary duty, unjust enrichment, waste of corporate assets, ultra virus acts, and rescission of all stock option contracts between the officer defendants and Activision entered into during the Relevant Period.

On October 31, 2006, the three pending state court actions were consolidated and renamed In re Activision Shareholder Derivative Litigation. Amalgamated Bank was appointed Co-Lead Plaintiff. On January 22, 2007, the consolidated action was transferred to Department 311 (Complex Litigation Program of the Los Angeles Superior Court). Following an Initial Status Conference before the Honorable Carl J. West, a briefing schedule was issued. Plaintiffs filed their Amended Consolidated Shareholder Derivative Complaint (the “Complaint”) on March 20, 2007, pursuant to the Court’s Order.

Nominal Defendant Activision filed a motion to stay this consolidated state court action in favor of a different and later filed federal action pending in the United States District Court, Central District. Defendant Barry Plaga filed a Petition to Compel Arbitration and defendants Steele, Dewar, and Baker each filed motions to challenge jurisdiction. Lead Plaintiffs opposed all three motions. The case was temporarily stayed pending resolution of the motions to dismiss in the federal action. Lead Plaintiffs petitioned the court to proceed on issues that do not duplicate or conflict with the federal action. The Court granted leave to file a second amended complaint, which Lead Plaintiffs filed on July 13, 2007. On September 5, 2007, the Individual Defendants filed a motion to strike Lead Plaintiffs' jury demand. In addition, Activision filed a demurrer to the second amended complaint. Lead Plaintiffs intend to oppose both the motion to strike and the demurrer. On October 10, 2007, Lead Plaintiffs filed oppositions to the motion to strike and the demurrer. The hearing on these motions is currently pending.

Firm Partner David Stickney and associates Brett Middleton and Takeo Kellar are responsible for prosecuting this action.


Home | Cases | Institutional Investor Services | News & Events | Publications | FAQs | Offices | Careers | Careers | Contact Us | Search

Site Map - Disclaimer - Attorney Advertising

For additional information please email your request to blbg@blbglaw.com or call us at 800-380-8496
© 2008 Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann LLP. All rights reserved.
This Web site contains Attorney Advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.