Legal Proceedings Regarding the Merger with CenterPoint Energy, Inc.
As previously disclosed, on April 21, 2018, Vectren Corporation, an Indiana corporation (the “Company”), CenterPoint Energy, Inc., a Texas corporation (“Parent”) and Pacer Merger Sub, Inc., an Indiana corporation and wholly owned subsidiary of Parent (“Merger Sub”), entered into a definitive Agreement and Plan of Merger (“Merger Agreement”). Subject to the satisfaction or waiver of certain conditions in the Merger Agreement, Merger Sub will merge with and into the Company, with the Company surviving such merger (the “Merger”).
On July 16, 2018, the Company filed a definitive proxy statement (the “Proxy Statement”) with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) for the solicitation of proxies in connection with the special meeting of the Company’s shareholders (the “Shareholders”) to be held on August 28, 2018, to consider and vote on a proposal to approve the Merger Agreement and the transactions contemplated thereby, including the Merger.
As previously disclosed, seven purported shareholders of the Company filed lawsuits in July 2018 under the federal securities laws in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana challenging the accuracy of the disclosures made in the Company’s Proxy Statement in connection with the Merger. These cases were captioned Kuebler v. Vectren Corp., et al., Case No.3:18-cv-00113-RLY-MPB (S.D. Ind.) (the “Kuebler Action”), Danigelis v. Vectren Corp., et al., Case No.3:18-cv-00114-RLY-MPB (S.D. Ind.) (the “Danigelis Action”), Scarantino v. Vectren Corp., et al., Case No.3:18-cv-00115-RLY-MPB (S.D. Ind.) (the “Scarantino Action”), Stein v. Vectren Corp., et al., Case No.3:18-cv-00117-RLY-MPB (S.D. Ind.) (the “Stein Action”), Nisenshal v. Vectren Corp., et al., Case No.3:18-cv-00121-RLY-MPB (S.D. Ind.) (the “Nisenshal Action”), VonSalzen v. Vectren Corp., et al., Case No.3:18-cv-00122-RLY-MPB (S.D. Ind.) (the “VonSalzen Action”), and Kent v. Vectren Corp., et al., Case No.1:18-cv-02263-SEB-TAB (S.D. Ind.) (the “Kent Action”). All seven actions alleged violations of Sections 14(a) and 20(a) of the Exchange Act and Rule14a-9 promulgated thereunder based on various alleged omissions of material information from the Proxy Statement.
On July 10, 2018, the plaintiffs in the Kuebler Action and in the Danigelis Action filed a motion for preliminary injunction seeking to enjoin the Company from consummating the Merger. On August 8, 2018, the court set the motion for preliminary injunction for hearing on August 15, 2018. On August 10, 2018, the court entered an order consolidating the seven cases and named as lead plaintiff the group of Michael Kuebler, James Danigelis, and Michael Nisenshal, and named as lead counsel the group of Monteverde & Associates P.C., Ademi & O’Reilly, LLP, Weiss Law LLP, and Shartzer Law Firm, LLC. On August 15, 2018, defendants filed a motion to dismiss the consolidated action.
On August 15, 2018, the court held a hearing on the motion for preliminary injunction in the consolidated action. On August 22, 2018, the court issued an order denying Plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction in the consolidated action.