Judge Rules Shareholder Derivative Suit on Behalf of Diebold Can Proceed, an Ohio Publication Reports

On April 26, 2011, Ohio-based publication CantonRep.com reported that a shareholder of Diebold, Inc., represented by Robbins Umeda LLP,* can proceed with a suit on behalf of the company against its current and former directors and officers. The article also provides details on the shareholder derivative action.

In the case, the shareholder plaintiff claims that Diebold lost tens of millions of dollars in connection with a 2008 U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission investigation, and that directors and officers of the company caused the company to waste hundreds of millions of dollars by buying back stock at an artificially inflated price. The defendants had asked Judge Frank Forchione to throw out the case, arguing that the lawsuit was premature because the plaintiff didn’t demand that the board of directors pursue the claims first. However, in his April 25, 2011, ruling Judge Forchione sided with the shareholder represented by Robbins Umeda LLP, writing that it was “highly unlikely that the directors would have been willing to bring suit against themselves.”

Robbins Umeda LLP partner Kevin A. Seely is quoted in the article as saying, “Our client is a concerned shareholder that questioned the practices of some of the officers and directors at Diebold that she felt were not in the company’s best interest. We will continue to pursue accountability at Diebold on behalf of the company and its shareholders.”

The case is Levine v. Geswein, et al., Case No. 2010-CV-3848, in the Court of Common Please, Stark County, Ohio.

To view the article on CantonRep.com’s website, click here.

Note: This link is provided for educational and public interest purposes only.  It does not constitute an endorsement of Robbins Umeda LLP by the author or publisher.

* The firm name changed from Robbins Umeda LLP to Robbins Arroyo LLP on January 1, 2013.

    Send This Post