About EDGAR Online | Login
 
Enter your Email for a Free Trial:
The following is an excerpt from a 10-Q SEC Filing, filed by DISCREET LOGIC INC on 11/17/1998.
Next Section Next Section Previous Section Previous Section
DISCREET LOGIC INC - 10-Q - 19981117 - LEGAL_PROCEEDING

Item 1. Legal Proceedings

On May 29, 1996, June 13, 1996 and April 29, 1997, certain of Discreet's shareholders filed class action lawsuits alleging violations of federal securities laws and other claims against Discreet and certain of its officers and directors, among others. The three lawsuits were filed in the Superior Court of the State of California, the United States District Court, District of Massachusetts and the United States District Court, Northern District of California, respectively. On or about November 25, 1997, a settlement of all three shareholder class actions received final court approval. Under the $10,800,000 settlement, Discreet contributed approximately $7,400,000 from its own funds, with the remainder provided by insurance.

On June 2, 1998, the Company was named as a defendant in a breach of warranty action filed in the Supreme Court of the State of New York for the County of New York entitled Griffith & Tekushan, Inc. v. Discreet Logic, Inc. (Index No. 602684/98) (the ''Action''). The complaint alleges, among other things, that the Company breached certain warranties arising out of a software licensing agreement and seeks damages of $1 million. On July 10, 1998, the Action was removed from state court to the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (Case No. 98 Civ. 4909 (BSJ)). On July 17, 1998, the Company filed a motion to dismiss the Action in its entirety. The motion to dismiss is currently pending. The Company intends to contest this case vigorously; however, the ultimate outcome of the case cannot be predicted at this point.

On August 28, 1998 a complaint was filed in the Marin County, California, Superior Court, entitled Jerry Krim, on Behalf of Himself and All Others Similarly Situated, vs. Discreet Logic Inc., et al., case No. 174792. The lawsuit relates to the proposed merger transaction with Autodesk and names as defendants Discreet's directors and certain unidentified ''John Does.'' The complaint alleges that the defendants breached their fiduciary duties to shareholders in connection with the proposed merger transaction. The complaint asks the court to enjoin the consummation of the transaction or, alternatively, seeks to rescind the transaction or an award of unspecified damages from the defendants in the event the transaction is consummated. Discreet believes the claims asserted in the complaint are without merit and intends to vigorously contest them. On October 26, 1998, the Company filed motions to dismiss the action, which currently are pending.

On September 29, 1998, a complaint was filed in the Marin County, California, Superior Court, entitled William Clark, et al vs. Discreet Logic Inc., et al., case No.175037. The lawsuit relates to the proposed merger transaction with Autodesk and names as defendants certain of Discreet's directors and certain unidentified ''John Does.'' The complaint alleges that the defendants breached their fiduciary duties to shareholders in connection with the proposed merger transaction. The complaint asks the court to enjoin the closing of the transaction or, alternatively, seeks to rescind the transaction or an award of unspecified damages from the defendants in the event the transaction is consummated. Discreet believes the claims asserted in the complaint are without merit and intends to vigorously contest them.

BROKERAGE PARTNERS