British Printing & Communication Corp. PLC v. Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, Inc.

664 F. Supp. 1519 (1987)

From our private database of 46,500+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

British Printing & Communication Corp. PLC v. Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, Inc.

United States District Court for the Southern District of New York
664 F. Supp. 1519 (1987)

  • Written by Heather Whittemore, JD

Facts

British Printing & Communication Corp. PLC (BPCC) (plaintiff) owned the majority of convertible debentures issued by Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, Inc. (Harcourt) (defendant). First Boston Corporation was Harcourt’s principal financial advisor. In 1987 Robert Maxwell, the chairman and chief executive officer of BPCC, proposed a merger of BPCC with Harcourt. In exchange, BPCC would pay $44 per share of Harcourt’s common stock. Executives from Harcourt and First Boston met five times over the next week to discuss the proposed merger. After extensive reviews of Harcourt’s business outlook and Maxwell’s proposed merger, Harcourt and First Boston decided that Maxwell’s offer was inadequate and insincere. Executives from Harcourt and First Boston proposed an alternate recapitalization plan under which Harcourt would pay a special dividend of $40 per share to its common shareholders and increase ownership of Harcourt stock by its employees. First Boston would finance the recapitalization plan, and in exchange, Harcourt would give First Boston enough shares of Harcourt common stock to allow First Boston to participate in the running of Harcourt. Harcourt and First Boston believed the recapitalization plan would benefit Harcourt’s shareholders more than Maxwell’s proposed merger would, allowing the shareholders to receive an immediate payment while realizing Harcourt’s potential future growth, and incentivizing Harcourt’s employees to work more productively. BPCC sued Harcourt in federal district court, arguing that Harcourt’s board of directors breached their duties of care and loyalty by rejecting the proposed merger and adopting the recapitalization plan instead. BPCC filed a motion for a preliminary injunction to enjoin Harcourt’s recapitalization plan, arguing that the plan would cause irreparable harm to Harcourt’s shareholders.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Keenan, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 832,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,500 briefs - keyed to 994 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership