Title: Lehman Brothers Holdings, Inc. v. Spanish Broadcasting System, Inc.

State: delaware

Issuer: Delaware Supreme Court

Document:

1 
 
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE 
 
 
LEHMAN BROTHERS HOLDINGS § 
 
 
INC.,   
 
 
 
  
§ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
§  
No. 174, 2014 
Plaintiff-Below, 
 
 
§  
 
 
Appellant,   
 
 
§ 
Court Below:  Court of 
 
 
 
 
 
 
§ 
Chancery of the State of 
v.  
 
 
 
 
§ 
Delaware 
 
 
 
 
 
 
§ 
 
SPANISH BROADCASTING   
§ 
Consol. C.A. No. 8321-VCG 
SYSTEM, INC.,   
 
 
§ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
§ 
 
 
Defendant-Below,  
 
§ 
 
Appellee. 
 
 
 
§ 
 
 
 
Submitted: December 10, 2014 
Decided: 
December 11, 2014  
 
Before STRINE, Chief Justice; HOLLAND, RIDGELY, and VAUGHN, 
Justices; SILVERMAN, Judge, constituting the Court en Banc. 
 
O R D E R 
In this appeal, the plaintiff and appellant, Lehman Brothers Holdings, Inc., 
argues that the Court of Chancery erred in finding that the doctrine of acquiescence 
barred its claims.  The defendant and appellee, Spanish Broadcasting System, Inc., 
argues that the Court of Chancery was correct in dismissing Lehman’s claims, and 
also urges alternative grounds of affirmance, including that the doctrine of laches 
bars the claims, and that the underlying Certificate of Designation cannot 
                                          
 
 Sitting by designation under Del. Const. art. IV, § 12. 
2 
 
reasonably be read in a manner that expands the scope of preferential rights given 
to preferred stockholders like Lehman. 
We have carefully considered the arguments of the parties and find no error 
in the Court of Chancery’s determination that acquiescence barred Lehman’s 
claims, given the undisputed facts of record.1  We therefore affirm that 
determination substantially for the reasons stated in the Court of Chancery’s 
decision of February 25, 2014.  In so affirming, however, we do not imply any 
agreement or disagreement with the Court of Chancery’s determination that the 
doctrine of laches itself did not bar Lehman from proceeding.  Because the Court 
of Chancery did not err in applying the theory it did, we need not and do not reach 
that issue or Spanish Broadcasting System’s other asserted bases for affirmance, 
including its argument that the plaintiffs’ contract claim is substantively without 
merit.  
For these reasons, the judgment of the Court of Chancery is AFFIRMED.  IT 
IS SO ORDERED. 
 
BY THE COURT: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
/s/ Leo E. Strine, Jr. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Chief Justice  
                                          
 
1 Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. and T. Rowe Price High Yield Fund, Inc. v. Spanish 
Broadcasting System, Inc., Consol. C.A. No. 8321 (Del. Ch. Feb. 25, 2014).