Quimbee logo
DMCA.com Protection Status
From our private database of 18,800+ case briefs...

Rondeau v. Mosinee Paper Corp.

United States Supreme Court
422 U.S. 49, 95 S.Ct. 2069, 45 L.Ed.2d 12 (1975)


Francis Rondeau (defendant) bought up shares of Mosinee Paper Corp. (plaintiff) in his own name or through businesses or a foundation he owned. He quickly acquired more than 5 percent of Mosinee’s outstanding shares but failed to file a Schedule 13D disclosure as required under the Williams Act. Rondeau continued buying Mosinee stock until Mosinee’s chairman sent him a letter noting the disclosure problem. Rondeau consulted an attorney, then filed a Schedule 13D disclosing that he believed Mosinee’s stock was undervalued and a good investment, intended to obtain control of the company and was considering making a public cash tender offer to buy out other shareholders, and might make management changes upon obtaining control of the company. Mosinee sued, alleging that Rondeau, his companies, and banks that helped finance his acquisitions were engaged in a scheme to defraud the company and its shareholders, and that shareholders had sold shares without material information Rondeau was required to disclose under the Williams Act. Mosinee requested an injunction preventing Rondeau from voting his stock or acquiring more and requiring him to return the stock he had purchased. Rondeau claimed he did not know he was supposed to file the disclosure and that neither Mosinee nor its shareholders had suffered any harm because of his late filing. The court agreed and entered summary judgment for Rondeau. The appellate court reversed, reasoning that the late filing delayed the company’s efforts to respond to Rondeau’s takeover attempt and that the Williams Act does not require irreparable harm to enter injunctive relief. As a result, the appellate court enjoined Rondeau from voting his shares for five years. Rondeau appealed. Noting a split on the issue among the circuit courts, the Supreme Court granted review.

Rule of Law


Holding and Reasoning (Burger, J.)

Dissent (Brennan, 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 498,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read 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. Read more about Quimbee.

Here's why 498,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 18,800 briefs, keyed to 985 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.

Questions & Answers

Have a question about this case?

Sign up for a free 7-day trial and ask it

Sign up for a FREE 7-day trial