In re cablevision systems corporation options backdating litigation

08-Apr-2018 10:52 by 7 Comments

In re cablevision systems corporation options backdating litigation - Sex cam private russian

According to the Stipulation of Settlement (here), the Cablevision derivative lawsuit was settled for cash payments and other consideration that the parties have represented to the court has an aggregate value of $34.4 million.Specifically, the parties agreed that Cablevision will received a cash payment of $10 million from its D&O insurer, and “cash payments from and/or relinquishment of value and/or the waiver of specific claims by certain individuals” totaling $24.4 in valued.

The company revealed that it had awarded options to a Vice Chairman after his 1999 death, but backdated the options to make it appear that the grant was awarded when he was still alive.

In addition to these individual contributions, and in what is to me the most interesting part of this settlement, Cablevision Chairman Charles Dolan agreed to make a

The company revealed that it had awarded options to a Vice Chairman after his 1999 death, but backdated the options to make it appear that the grant was awarded when he was still alive.In addition to these individual contributions, and in what is to me the most interesting part of this settlement, Cablevision Chairman Charles Dolan agreed to make a $1 million cash payment to Cablevision, “to facilitate the resolution of the case.” His son, Chief Executive James Dolan, will also make a $1 million contribution, in addition to returning $366,250 for previously exercised options.What makes this agreement of the two Dolans to pay $1 million each interesting is Section 3.4 of the Stipulation of Settlement, which provides that the Settling Defendants “will not seek insurance coverage, reimbursement, contribution or indemnification for any of the consideration they provide …from any source, including but not limited to Cablevision, other Settling Defendants, any of the Insurers, or any other Related Person.” The various individual defendants’ returned options exercise proceeds or waived benefits arguably would not have been covered under the typical D&O policy in any event, as it appears to represent the return of compensation to which they were not entitled (coverage for which arguably would be excluded under most policies).Regardless, plaintiffs faced significant legal hurdles to show loss causation – that the actions of defendants were responsible for causing the stock losses – as well as damages. [y]ou are certainly free to try to change my mind.” A combination of novel legal argument, defendants’ own documents, and testimony did just that.Determined to find the pressure points that could lead to settlement, plaintiffs pursued two separate discovery matters, which ultimately forced the company’s hand. On June 4, 2008, Magistrate Judge Noel ordered that defendants produce the previously withheld documents to plaintiffs.First, the compensation consultant, Harvey Benenson, and/or his firm, Lyons Benenson, agreed to pay $2 million over three years, at 6 percent interest, secured by his Connecticut home.

||

The company revealed that it had awarded options to a Vice Chairman after his 1999 death, but backdated the options to make it appear that the grant was awarded when he was still alive.

In addition to these individual contributions, and in what is to me the most interesting part of this settlement, Cablevision Chairman Charles Dolan agreed to make a $1 million cash payment to Cablevision, “to facilitate the resolution of the case.” His son, Chief Executive James Dolan, will also make a $1 million contribution, in addition to returning $366,250 for previously exercised options.

What makes this agreement of the two Dolans to pay $1 million each interesting is Section 3.4 of the Stipulation of Settlement, which provides that the Settling Defendants “will not seek insurance coverage, reimbursement, contribution or indemnification for any of the consideration they provide …from any source, including but not limited to Cablevision, other Settling Defendants, any of the Insurers, or any other Related Person.” The various individual defendants’ returned options exercise proceeds or waived benefits arguably would not have been covered under the typical D&O policy in any event, as it appears to represent the return of compensation to which they were not entitled (coverage for which arguably would be excluded under most policies).

Regardless, plaintiffs faced significant legal hurdles to show loss causation – that the actions of defendants were responsible for causing the stock losses – as well as damages. [y]ou are certainly free to try to change my mind.” A combination of novel legal argument, defendants’ own documents, and testimony did just that.

Determined to find the pressure points that could lead to settlement, plaintiffs pursued two separate discovery matters, which ultimately forced the company’s hand. On June 4, 2008, Magistrate Judge Noel ordered that defendants produce the previously withheld documents to plaintiffs.

First, the compensation consultant, Harvey Benenson, and/or his firm, Lyons Benenson, agreed to pay $2 million over three years, at 6 percent interest, secured by his Connecticut home.

million cash payment to Cablevision, “to facilitate the resolution of the case.” His son, Chief Executive James Dolan, will also make a

The company revealed that it had awarded options to a Vice Chairman after his 1999 death, but backdated the options to make it appear that the grant was awarded when he was still alive.In addition to these individual contributions, and in what is to me the most interesting part of this settlement, Cablevision Chairman Charles Dolan agreed to make a $1 million cash payment to Cablevision, “to facilitate the resolution of the case.” His son, Chief Executive James Dolan, will also make a $1 million contribution, in addition to returning $366,250 for previously exercised options.What makes this agreement of the two Dolans to pay $1 million each interesting is Section 3.4 of the Stipulation of Settlement, which provides that the Settling Defendants “will not seek insurance coverage, reimbursement, contribution or indemnification for any of the consideration they provide …from any source, including but not limited to Cablevision, other Settling Defendants, any of the Insurers, or any other Related Person.” The various individual defendants’ returned options exercise proceeds or waived benefits arguably would not have been covered under the typical D&O policy in any event, as it appears to represent the return of compensation to which they were not entitled (coverage for which arguably would be excluded under most policies).Regardless, plaintiffs faced significant legal hurdles to show loss causation – that the actions of defendants were responsible for causing the stock losses – as well as damages. [y]ou are certainly free to try to change my mind.” A combination of novel legal argument, defendants’ own documents, and testimony did just that.Determined to find the pressure points that could lead to settlement, plaintiffs pursued two separate discovery matters, which ultimately forced the company’s hand. On June 4, 2008, Magistrate Judge Noel ordered that defendants produce the previously withheld documents to plaintiffs.First, the compensation consultant, Harvey Benenson, and/or his firm, Lyons Benenson, agreed to pay $2 million over three years, at 6 percent interest, secured by his Connecticut home.

||

The company revealed that it had awarded options to a Vice Chairman after his 1999 death, but backdated the options to make it appear that the grant was awarded when he was still alive.

In addition to these individual contributions, and in what is to me the most interesting part of this settlement, Cablevision Chairman Charles Dolan agreed to make a $1 million cash payment to Cablevision, “to facilitate the resolution of the case.” His son, Chief Executive James Dolan, will also make a $1 million contribution, in addition to returning $366,250 for previously exercised options.

What makes this agreement of the two Dolans to pay $1 million each interesting is Section 3.4 of the Stipulation of Settlement, which provides that the Settling Defendants “will not seek insurance coverage, reimbursement, contribution or indemnification for any of the consideration they provide …from any source, including but not limited to Cablevision, other Settling Defendants, any of the Insurers, or any other Related Person.” The various individual defendants’ returned options exercise proceeds or waived benefits arguably would not have been covered under the typical D&O policy in any event, as it appears to represent the return of compensation to which they were not entitled (coverage for which arguably would be excluded under most policies).

Regardless, plaintiffs faced significant legal hurdles to show loss causation – that the actions of defendants were responsible for causing the stock losses – as well as damages. [y]ou are certainly free to try to change my mind.” A combination of novel legal argument, defendants’ own documents, and testimony did just that.

Determined to find the pressure points that could lead to settlement, plaintiffs pursued two separate discovery matters, which ultimately forced the company’s hand. On June 4, 2008, Magistrate Judge Noel ordered that defendants produce the previously withheld documents to plaintiffs.

First, the compensation consultant, Harvey Benenson, and/or his firm, Lyons Benenson, agreed to pay $2 million over three years, at 6 percent interest, secured by his Connecticut home.

million contribution, in addition to returning 6,250 for previously exercised options.

What makes this agreement of the two Dolans to pay

The company revealed that it had awarded options to a Vice Chairman after his 1999 death, but backdated the options to make it appear that the grant was awarded when he was still alive.In addition to these individual contributions, and in what is to me the most interesting part of this settlement, Cablevision Chairman Charles Dolan agreed to make a $1 million cash payment to Cablevision, “to facilitate the resolution of the case.” His son, Chief Executive James Dolan, will also make a $1 million contribution, in addition to returning $366,250 for previously exercised options.What makes this agreement of the two Dolans to pay $1 million each interesting is Section 3.4 of the Stipulation of Settlement, which provides that the Settling Defendants “will not seek insurance coverage, reimbursement, contribution or indemnification for any of the consideration they provide …from any source, including but not limited to Cablevision, other Settling Defendants, any of the Insurers, or any other Related Person.” The various individual defendants’ returned options exercise proceeds or waived benefits arguably would not have been covered under the typical D&O policy in any event, as it appears to represent the return of compensation to which they were not entitled (coverage for which arguably would be excluded under most policies).Regardless, plaintiffs faced significant legal hurdles to show loss causation – that the actions of defendants were responsible for causing the stock losses – as well as damages. [y]ou are certainly free to try to change my mind.” A combination of novel legal argument, defendants’ own documents, and testimony did just that.Determined to find the pressure points that could lead to settlement, plaintiffs pursued two separate discovery matters, which ultimately forced the company’s hand. On June 4, 2008, Magistrate Judge Noel ordered that defendants produce the previously withheld documents to plaintiffs.First, the compensation consultant, Harvey Benenson, and/or his firm, Lyons Benenson, agreed to pay $2 million over three years, at 6 percent interest, secured by his Connecticut home.

||

The company revealed that it had awarded options to a Vice Chairman after his 1999 death, but backdated the options to make it appear that the grant was awarded when he was still alive.

In addition to these individual contributions, and in what is to me the most interesting part of this settlement, Cablevision Chairman Charles Dolan agreed to make a $1 million cash payment to Cablevision, “to facilitate the resolution of the case.” His son, Chief Executive James Dolan, will also make a $1 million contribution, in addition to returning $366,250 for previously exercised options.

What makes this agreement of the two Dolans to pay $1 million each interesting is Section 3.4 of the Stipulation of Settlement, which provides that the Settling Defendants “will not seek insurance coverage, reimbursement, contribution or indemnification for any of the consideration they provide …from any source, including but not limited to Cablevision, other Settling Defendants, any of the Insurers, or any other Related Person.” The various individual defendants’ returned options exercise proceeds or waived benefits arguably would not have been covered under the typical D&O policy in any event, as it appears to represent the return of compensation to which they were not entitled (coverage for which arguably would be excluded under most policies).

Regardless, plaintiffs faced significant legal hurdles to show loss causation – that the actions of defendants were responsible for causing the stock losses – as well as damages. [y]ou are certainly free to try to change my mind.” A combination of novel legal argument, defendants’ own documents, and testimony did just that.

Determined to find the pressure points that could lead to settlement, plaintiffs pursued two separate discovery matters, which ultimately forced the company’s hand. On June 4, 2008, Magistrate Judge Noel ordered that defendants produce the previously withheld documents to plaintiffs.

First, the compensation consultant, Harvey Benenson, and/or his firm, Lyons Benenson, agreed to pay $2 million over three years, at 6 percent interest, secured by his Connecticut home.

million each interesting is Section 3.4 of the Stipulation of Settlement, which provides that the Settling Defendants “will not seek insurance coverage, reimbursement, contribution or indemnification for any of the consideration they provide …from any source, including but not limited to Cablevision, other Settling Defendants, any of the Insurers, or any other Related Person.” The various individual defendants’ returned options exercise proceeds or waived benefits arguably would not have been covered under the typical D&O policy in any event, as it appears to represent the return of compensation to which they were not entitled (coverage for which arguably would be excluded under most policies).

Regardless, plaintiffs faced significant legal hurdles to show loss causation – that the actions of defendants were responsible for causing the stock losses – as well as damages. [y]ou are certainly free to try to change my mind.” A combination of novel legal argument, defendants’ own documents, and testimony did just that.

Determined to find the pressure points that could lead to settlement, plaintiffs pursued two separate discovery matters, which ultimately forced the company’s hand. On June 4, 2008, Magistrate Judge Noel ordered that defendants produce the previously withheld documents to plaintiffs.

First, the compensation consultant, Harvey Benenson, and/or his firm, Lyons Benenson, agreed to pay million over three years, at 6 percent interest, secured by his Connecticut home.

He will also forfeit

He will also forfeit $1.5 million severance he claimed.

Noel cautioned plaintiffs’ counsel, “I think I [previously] . With a court order requiring United Health to produce documents defendants considered to be work product, and the knowledge that devastating information would be made available for all the world to see, plaintiffs gave defendants no choice but to come to the bargaining table and resolve the case.

Shortly after reaching the $895 million settlement with the company, the remaining defendants, former CEO William W.

On May 15, 2012, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the decision of the district court finding in favor of the Securities Exchange Commission (“SEC”) on allegations that Carl Jasper, the former Chief Financial Officer of Maxim Integrated Products, Inc., violated various provisions of the securities laws in connection with the company’s stock options backdating scheme.

The court found that for ten consecutive quarters, Maxim granted backdated options with an exercise price equal to the lowest price of Maxim stock for each quarter.

Elson added that the settlement with Mc Guire is a “significant accomplishment” that “doesn’t happen very often.”in executive compensation in the future.

||

He will also forfeit $1.5 million severance he claimed.Noel cautioned plaintiffs’ counsel, “I think I [previously] . With a court order requiring United Health to produce documents defendants considered to be work product, and the knowledge that devastating information would be made available for all the world to see, plaintiffs gave defendants no choice but to come to the bargaining table and resolve the case.Shortly after reaching the $895 million settlement with the company, the remaining defendants, former CEO William W.On May 15, 2012, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the decision of the district court finding in favor of the Securities Exchange Commission (“SEC”) on allegations that Carl Jasper, the former Chief Financial Officer of Maxim Integrated Products, Inc., violated various provisions of the securities laws in connection with the company’s stock options backdating scheme. The court found that for ten consecutive quarters, Maxim granted backdated options with an exercise price equal to the lowest price of Maxim stock for each quarter.Elson added that the settlement with Mc Guire is a “significant accomplishment” that “doesn’t happen very often.”in executive compensation in the future.

.5 million severance he claimed.Noel cautioned plaintiffs’ counsel, “I think I [previously] . With a court order requiring United Health to produce documents defendants considered to be work product, and the knowledge that devastating information would be made available for all the world to see, plaintiffs gave defendants no choice but to come to the bargaining table and resolve the case.Shortly after reaching the 5 million settlement with the company, the remaining defendants, former CEO William W.On May 15, 2012, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the decision of the district court finding in favor of the Securities Exchange Commission (“SEC”) on allegations that Carl Jasper, the former Chief Financial Officer of Maxim Integrated Products, Inc., violated various provisions of the securities laws in connection with the company’s stock options backdating scheme. The court found that for ten consecutive quarters, Maxim granted backdated options with an exercise price equal to the lowest price of Maxim stock for each quarter.Elson added that the settlement with Mc Guire is a “significant accomplishment” that “doesn’t happen very often.”in executive compensation in the future.

  1. relative and chronometric dating 22-Feb-2018 12:53

    Free online dating in Binghamton for all ages and ethnicities, including seniors, White, Black women and Black men, Asian, Latino, Latina, and everyone else.

  2. Cam 2 cam with milfs for free no sign up 26-May-2018 23:50

    This will increase your security and privacy online.

  3. yahoo personals dating in de queen ar 21-Jan-2018 22:35

    It doesn’t end there, on Vdate Online you can also search by ethnicity or sexual orientation as well.