In Re Luxottica Group, S.P.A. Securities Litigation

BVLaw
Full Text of Court Cases
February 17, 2006

Access the Full Article

This article and its downloads are available with a subscription to any of these products:
Already a subscriber?  Login
This article is also available for purchase. (5,686 words)   Add to Cart >>
Need help? Contact us:
1-503-479-8200 ext 2 or sales@bvresources.com
5995 Optical Goods Stores
446130 Optical Goods Stores
breach of fiduciary duty
In Re Luxottica Group, S.P.A. Securities Litigation
2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 6133
US
Federal Court
New York
United States District Court
Anthony DiSarro, Bruce E. Fader, David Lloyd Wales, David M. Lederkramer, Eric M. Nelson, Gregg M. Mashberg, Joseph A. DiBenedetto, Matthew J. Morris, Matthew M. Guiney, Michael D. Torpey, Michael Joseph Friedman, Philip M. Smith, Stefanie S. Kraus, Will
J. Mark Penny (plaintiff shareholders)<br>John C. Coffee Jr. and Paul A. Gompers (defendants)
Weinstein

Summary

Court considers value of CEO non-compete to determine fairness of class-action settlement.
In Re Luxottica Group, S.P.A. Securities Litigation
PDF, Size: 642 KB

See Also

Value of CEO Noncompete Helps Court Determine Fairness of Class-Action Settlement

Legal and Court Case Update
June 2006

Court considers value of CEO noncompete to determine fairness of class-action settlement.