Archstone Litigation -- Stender v. Archstone Smith Operating Trust, et al.
On November 30, 2007, Wexler Wallace instituted litigation on behalf of a class of investors who had negotiated for securities with certain essential characteristics, only to see those characteristics stripped away through a merger transaction in which the investors had no say. The complaint alleges, among other things, breaches of fiduciary duty, breach of contract and civil conspiracy. Read more.
Virginia M. Damon Trust v. Mackinaw Financial Corporation et al.
This shareholder derivative action alleged that the former CEO of North Country Financial Corporation’s (now Mackinac Financial Corp.) breached his fiduciary duties by mismanaging the bank’s commercial loan portfolio, failing to heed repeated warnings from regulators regarding internal controls, and failing to correct specific deficiencies in the bank's underwriting, loan collection, and loan administration functions. Our client further alleged that the Bank underwent years of gross mismanagement that ultimately resulted in cease and desist orders from the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation and the Michigan Office of Financial and Insurance Services. Through Wexler Wallace's efforts, the bank received a multi-million dollar settlement. Read more.
List v. List
Wexler Wallace was lead counsel in this case alleging mismanagement and waste at a closely held manufacturing concern. The firm was retained by shareholders after a decade of litigation. Ed Wallace was lead trial counsel in the successful bench trial defeating fee claims against the firm’s clients. After significant discovery relating to financial transactions of the company's former chief executive officer and extensive negotiations, Wexler Wallace was able to resolve this long-running dispute. Read more.
In re Balanced Return Fund Limited et al. v. Royal Bank of Canada
Wexler Wallace represents a hedge fund in this breach of fiduciary case against the Royal Bank of Canada (“RBC”) and related Defendants (with RBC, the “RBC Defendants”), which seeks to recover investments in Olympus United Funds (the “Fund”) lost during the period from 2000 through mid-2005 as a result of conduct by the RBC Defendants that caused the collapse of the Fund. Specifically, the RBC Defendants disregarded the interests of the Plaintiffs and other investors in favor of their own interests by approving a transaction which depleted the Fund of assets while appropriating the benefits of those assets for themselves. Read more.