50 F.3d 644: Lawrence Epstein, et al., Plaintiffs,andwalter Minton, Plaintiff-appellant, v. Mca, Inc.; Matsushita Acquisition Corporation; Matsushitaelectric Industrial Co., Ltd.; Matsushita Holdingcorporation; Lew Wasserman; Sidney J.sheinberg, Defendants-appellees.lawrence Epstein; John Linder; Jane Rockford, As Trusteeof the Michael J. Rockford Trust; Maurice Karlin;ruth Karlin; Beth Ann Karlin; Bert P.karlin, Plaintiffs-appellants, v. Mca, Inc.; Matsushita Acquisition Corporation; Matsushitaelectric Industrial Co., Ltd.; Matsushita Holdingcorporation; Lew Wasserman; Sidney J.sheinberg, Defendants-appellees

Share |

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. - 50 F.3d 644

Argued and Submitted Aug. 2, 1993.Submission Vacated Aug. 13, 1993.Reargued and Resubmitted Oct. 12, 1993.Decided Feb. 27, 1995

Peter R. Dion-Kindem and Laurence M. Berman, Berman, Blanchard, Mausner & Kindem, Los Angeles, CA, for Minton, plaintiff-appellant.

Henry Paul Monaghan; Irving Malchman and Roger W. Kirby, Kaufman, Malchman, Kirby & Squire, New York City, for Epstein, plaintiffs-appellants.

Herbert M. Wachtell, Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz, New York City, for Wasserman and Sheinberg, defendants-appellees.

Barry R. Ostrager and Mary Kay Vyskocil, Simpson, Thacher & Bartlett, New York City, for Matsushita and MCA, defendants-appellees.

Appeals from the United States District Court for the Central District of California.

Before: NORRIS, WIGGINS, and O'SCANNLAIN, Circuit Judges.

WILLIAM A. NORRIS, Circuit Judge:

                               TABLE OF CONTENTS
   I.  Private Right of Action under Section 14(d)(7)                       649
  II.  The Wasserman Transaction                                            652
 III.  The Sheinberg Payment                                                657
  IV.  The Preclusive Effect of the Settlement of the Delaware Class        659
         Action
       A.  The Delaware Settlement                                          659
       B.  The Full Faith and Credit Question                               661
           1.  The Jurisdiction of State Courts to Release Exclusively      661
                 Federal Claims in a Class Settlement
           2.  The Disparity Between the State and Federal Claims           665
       C.  The Contract Bar Argument                                        666
       D.  Conclusion                                                       668
   V.  Class Certification                                                  668
  VI.  The Motion to Amend the Complaint                                    669
 VII.  Conclusion                                                           669