Huff Fund Investment Partnership d/b/a Musashi II Ltd. v. CKx, Inc.

2013 WL 5878807 (2013)

From our private database of 46,000+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Huff Fund Investment Partnership d/b/a Musashi II Ltd. v. CKx, Inc.

Delaware Court of Chancery
2013 WL 5878807 (2013)

  • Written by Heather Whittemore, JD

Facts

CKx, Inc. (defendant) was an entertainment company that owned several popular television franchises. By 2011 the franchises owned by CKx were declining in ratings. That year, three private-equity firms, including Apollo, submitted bids to purchase CKx. CKx negotiated with the bidders and also reached out to other potential buyers. Eventually, CKx accepted Apollo’s bid, and CKx merged into Apollo. Though Apollo had initially bid $5 per share, its final bid for CKx was $5.50 per share. A group of CKx shareholders (the opposing shareholders) (plaintiffs) opposed the merger and exercised their appraisal rights to receive fair value for their shares. The opposing shareholders used multiple valuation methods, including a comparable-company analysis and a discounted-cash-flow analysis, to value the shares at $11.02 per share. In making their comparable-company analysis, the opposing shareholders could not find companies that were fully comparable to CKx. CKx used a discounted-cash-flow analysis to value the shares at $4.41 per share. Though the opposing shareholders and CKx used different cash-flow projections to conduct their discounted-cash-flow analyses, both parties used projections that were made by CKx during contract negotiations, meaning the projections were not made in the ordinary course of CKx’s business.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Glasscock, 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 743,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
  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.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 743,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,000 briefs, keyed to 986 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 743,000 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
  • 46,000 briefs - keyed to 986 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