As previously disclosed, on July 25, 2021, Capstead Mortgage Corporation, a Maryland corporation (“Capstead”), entered into an Agreement and Plan of Merger, as amended pursuant to that certain First Amendment to Agreement and Plan of Merger, dated as of September 22, 2021 (as amended, the “Merger Agreement”), with Benefit Street Partners Realty Trust, Inc., a Maryland corporation (“BSPRT”), Rodeo Sub I, LLC, a Maryland limited liability company and a wholly-owned subsidiary of BSPRT (“Merger Sub”), and Benefit Street Partners L.L.C., a Delaware limited liability company (“BSPRT Advisor”), pursuant to which, subject to the terms and conditions therein, Capstead will merge with and into Merger Sub, with Merger Sub remaining as a wholly-owned subsidiary of BSPRT (such transaction, the “Merger”). On September 7, 2021, Capstead and BSPRT respectively filed a definitive proxy statement/prospectus (the “Definitive Proxy Statement”) with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) for the solicitation of proxies in connection with the special meeting of the common stockholders of Capstead, to be held on October 15, 2021, to vote upon matters in connection with the Merger. On September 23, 2021, Capstead and BSPRT respectively filed a supplement to the Definitive Proxy Statement (as supplemented, the “Proxy Statement”) with respect to the First Amendment to Agreement and Plan of Merger.
Five lawsuits have been filed by purported stockholders of Capstead with respect to the Merger. The first suit, styled as Shiva Stein v. Capstead Mortgage Corporation, et al., No. 1:21-cv-7306 (the “Stein Lawsuit”), was filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York on August 31, 2021, and asserts claims against Capstead, members of the Capstead board of directors (the “Capstead Board”), BSPRT and Merger Sub. The second suit, styled as Matthew Hopkins v. Capstead Mortgage Corporation, et al., No. 1:21-cv-07369 (the “Hopkins Lawsuit”), was filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York on September 1, 2021, and asserts claims against Capstead, members of the Capstead Board, BSPRT, Merger Sub and BSPRT Advisor. The third suit, styled as Bryan Harrington v. Capstead Mortgage Corporation, et al., No. 1:21-cv-05080 (the “Harrington Lawsuit”), was filed in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York on September 11, 2021, and asserts claims against Capstead and members of the Capstead Board. The fourth suit, styled as Randy Gill v. Capstead Mortgage Corporation, et al., No. 1:21-cv-07973 (the “Gill Lawsuit”), was filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York on September 24, 2021, and asserts claims against Capstead and members of the Capstead Board. The fifth suit, styled as Jordan Wilson v. Capstead Mortgage Corporation, et al., No. 1:21-cv-08147-UA (the “Wilson Lawsuit”), was filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York on October 1, 2021, and asserts claims against Capstead and members of the Capstead Board.
Capstead has also received demand letters from two purported stockholders, Brett Braafhart and Angelo Fisichella, threatening to assert claims against Capstead and members of the Capstead Board (such demand letters, together with the Stein Lawsuit, the Hopkins Lawsuit, the Harrington Lawsuit, the Gill Lawsuit and the Wilson Lawsuit, the “Lawsuits”).
Each of the Lawsuits alleges that certain of the disclosures in the Proxy Statement are deficient, and seeks preliminary and injunctive relief. While Capstead believes that the disclosures set forth in the Proxy Statement comply fully with applicable law, in order to address certain disclosure claims in the Lawsuits, minimize the cost, risk and uncertainty inherent in litigation, avoid nuisance and preclude any efforts to delay the completion of the Merger, Capstead has determined to voluntarily supplement the Proxy Statement with the supplemental disclosures set forth below (the “Supplemental Disclosures”). Nothing in the Supplemental Disclosures shall be deemed an admission of liability, wrongdoing or the legal merit, necessity or materiality under applicable laws of any of the disclosures set forth herein. To the contrary, Capstead believes the claims asserted in the Lawsuits are without merit and expressly denies all allegations in the Lawsuits, including that any additional disclosure was or is required.
Supplemental Disclosures to Proxy Statement
The following Supplemental Disclosures should be read in conjunction with the Proxy Statement, which should be read in its entirety. All page references are to pages in the Definitive Proxy Statement, and terms used below, unless otherwise defined, have the meanings set forth in the Proxy Statement. Underlined text shows text being added to a referenced disclosure in the Proxy Statement.