Logourl black

Field v. Trump

United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
850 F.2d 938 (1988)


Julius and Eddie Trump (the Trumps) (defendants) proposed to acquire Pay’n Save, Inc. through a two-step merger. On September 7, 1984, the board of Pay’n Save accepted the Trumps’ offer and announced that the Trumps would commence a tender offer at $22.50 per share to be followed by a cash-out merger at the same price. Two Pay’n Save directors, Samuel Stroum and Stuart Sloan, dissented from the proposal and issued a statement criticizing the board. On September 12, the Trumps informed the Pay’n Save board that they were withdrawing their tender offer in order to negotiate with Stroum and Sloan. The same day, the Trumps reached an agreement to purchase Stroum and Sloan’s holdings for $3.3 million, a rate of $23.50 per share. Additionally, the Trumps agreed to pay $900,000 for Stroum and Sloan’s expenses. The total sum equaled a price of $25 per share. On September 13, Pay’n Save’s board announced that the Trumps would soon open a new tender offer for shares of Pay’n Save at a price of $23.50 per share. A Pay’n Save shareholder (plaintiff) who tendered shares at $23.50, sued the Trumps, Pay’n Save, and Pay’n Save’s directors and officers on behalf of a purported class of shareholders. The complaint alleged that the Trumps made a discriminatory tender offer that granted Stroum and Sloan a better price in violation of Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Rule 14d-10. The trial court granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss, holding that because the Trumps had withdrawn their initial tender offer, the best price rule did not apply to the transaction with Stroum and Sloan. The plaintiff appealed.

Rule of Law

The rule of law is the black letter law upon which the court rested its decision. To access this section, start your 7-day free trial of Quimbee for Law Students.


The issue section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question. To access this section, start your 7-day free trial of Quimbee for Law Students.

Holding and Reasoning (Winter, J.)

The holding and reasoning section includes:

  • A “yes” or “no” answer to the question framed in the issue section;
  • A summary of the majority or plurality opinion, using the CREAC method; and
  • The procedural disposition (e.g. reversed and remanded, affirmed, etc.).

To access this section, start your 7-day free trial of Quimbee for Law Students.

Here's why 92,000 law students rely 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.
  • 12,498 briefs - keyed to 168 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.
  • Ability to tag case briefs in an outlining tool.
  • Top-notch customer support.
Start Your Free Trial Now