+
More
Dear Friends, After years of coverage, Bouchard’s BFF and man I view as Delaware’s filthiest attorney and his employer—Kevin Shannon and Potter Anderson—are about to cash in, in the Twitter vs. Elon Musk case. Shannon’s relationship with the Chancellor greased the TransPerfect case into a 7-year $250 million of orchestrated corruption in Delaware’s Court of Chancery. Twitter shareholders and employees have no idea what’s about to be unleashed in terms of fees. To make matters completely bonkers, Kevin “able to win cases with no witnesses” Shannon has teamed with his old pal, disgraced ex-Chancellor Leo Strine, who resigned mid-term amidst corruption allegations. Shareholders and employees are sure to get fleeced, as the Good Old Boy Network starts dancing its Delaware two-step. Both Shannon and Strine have been hired by Twitter, because they’re not stupid, folks. They fully agree with what I have been saying all along: To win in Delaware, where the “fix is in” you need to hire fixers. When I close my eyes and imagine this case, I see a business murders row I’ve studied for years with Shannon, Strine, Skadden, and now Andre Bouchard’s replacement, Chancellor Kathaleen “McCorrupt” McCormick. How long will Delaware’s elected officials allow Shannon and Strine to profit from cronyism? I would love to hear your feedback on this! It’s always welcome and appreciated. Respectfully yours, JUDSON Bennett-Coastal NetworkOPINION Leo Strine #MeToo’d at Bourbon Street Bar? Former Chancellor Bouchard’s Rumored “relationship” with Tulane Law Professor? Kevin Shannon Co-Paneling with Judges to Steer Case Outcomes? … It’s One Dark Rumor After Another but rooted in circumstantial happenstance. … It all stems from Taxpayer Dollars being wasted In The Chancery’s Annual New Orleans, incestuous, back-scratching, road trip! Will Delawareans Continue to Allow Taxpayer Dollars to Finance Chancery March Madness in New Orleans? Dear Friends, Rumors are just rumors, but when there is enough smoke, one must consider the possibility of fire… This Tulane boondoggle is a virtual symbol of Chancery Court corruption, and it’s high time we shut the Good Ole Boys Club down in it, or at least stop Delawareans paying for it! I have heard more stories from more credible sources than I can remember about debaucherous behavior from these Delaware Law Supervillains in the Big Easy. It’s time to reign in this event! As I have said, Delaware’s Chancery Court and its parasitic cronies are the Purdue Pharma of the legal world, and this boondoggle party throwing is precisely analogous to the predatory tactics of the Purdue Pharma sales reps. Yes, Bouchard and Strine both resigned in disgrace—but before they were brought to justice for their corruption in the TransPerfect case. So, you might say, why do I care? Because history tends to repeat itself. Don’t defund the police. Send these racist corrupt cronies of Chancery a message, and… Defund the Chancery Court New Orleans Boondoggle!!! Call your elected representatives and defund Chancery’s Bourbon Street Debauchery. A link to the event: Please send your feedback on this, folks. It’s always appreciated and welcome. Respectfully Yours, Judson Bennett – Coastal Network P.S. For background on Bouchard-Era Corruption, and why it is so important to end it, please see my own article from 5 years ago calling out government corruption:
OPINION | THE TRANSPERFECT CASE IS ACTUALLY THE CASE  FOR THE IMPEACHMENT OF CHANCELLOR BOUCHARD


 

Will Delaware Ever Be Clean of what I believe is the Bouchard-Era Corruption?

Potter Anderson — the law firm of Kevin Shannon, the dirtiest lawyer in Delaware in my opinion – is now the law firm for Robert Pincus in his latest Court-appointed Custodianship. Apparently, in my view, one dirty legal hand washes the other in Delaware! During the famous TransPerfect case in Delaware‘s Chancery Court, when Potter Anderson and Kevin Shannon started losing, they basically started calling Pincus unethical! Potter Anderson said Pincus had a “disabling conflict of interest” and that he “abandoned his duties” as Custodian to act in his own self-interest instead. After all that, which law firm does Pincus pick? Potter Anderson?!? The same firm that dragged Pincus’ name through the mud during his last Custodianship, which he now chooses to be his firm? Does this sound legit? To anyone? I’m even putting aside, for now, the huge question of how Pincus — accused of being a billing fraudster — even gets another gig from the Courts?! Is this just another opportunity to print money for himself?? I have to wonder, in my opinion, with one dirty, elite legal hand washing the other, with this same gang apparently up to their old tricks again– Will Delaware ever be clean? Mark my words folks: In my view, if we don’t proactively put an end to what I like to repeatedly call the Andre Bouchard-Era corruption, ordinary Delaware taxpayers will eventually pay the price. Send me feedback on this charade folks! Your comments are appreciated. Sincerely Yours, JUDSON Bennett – Coastal NetworkWhat a shocker, folks! Whenever I read about Bouchard’s long-time friend and country club crony, Kevin Shannon of Potter Anderson, involved in a decision in Delaware’s Chancery Court, I have to wonder: It is another win!! What are the odds?? If you wanted mathematical proof that the Chancery Court, in my educated personal opinion, is now nothing more than a corrupt parasite that leeches off the people and businesses of Delaware, my view is that you need look no further than Kevin Shannon’s win percentage? Further, you may remember how many of the cast of cronies – who in my opinion, got rich or enriched their pals, off the backs of TransPerfect’s workers – all got super cozy with each other in the first place? They worked on Delaware’s 2nd most famous case, the Disney/Ovitz case: Shannon, Bouchard, and Kramer Levin (including Gary Navtalis himself) all worked as co-counsel against the shareholders – in fighting to allow management – to give Ovitz one of the largest executive severance payments in history. It’s just another amazing coincidence that could only happen in Delaware. It’s an outrageous disgrace in my opinion. As I see it – and it is my definite belief that these people are possible co-conspirators who met on Disney-Ovitz – I believe they’ve been working together to extract millions together in many ways ever since! Folks, the Chancery Court in my opinion, under Bouchard has been a corrupt disgrace for over 6 years. When I think about Chancellor Bouchard, Kevin Shannon, Jennifer Voss, and Bob Pincus, no matter how much I wash, I can’t feel clean. Something is way too coincidental, subjective, and seemingly inequitable. The verdict is still out on McCormick. Let’s pray for a better tomorrow. Please check out the article below and send your feedback, folks. It is always appreciated! Respectfully Yours, Judson Bennett Coastal Network Chancery Nixes Dyal Capital-Owl Rock Tie-Up Injunction By Jeff Montgomery Law360 (April 20, 2021, 5:04 PM EDT) — Sixth Street Partners Management Co. lost a battle Tuesday to block Dyal Capital Management’s $12.5 billion merger with Owl Rock Capital, after a Delaware vice chancellor branded its preliminary injunction motion as an unsupportable bid to force an undervalued Dyal sell-back of its stake in Sixth Street. Vice Chancellor Morgan T. Zurn, ruling after a hearing on March 24, found that Sixth Street’s suit and a similar, unsuccessful action by Golub Capital in New York “were part and parcel of a calculated effort to ‘muck up'” the Owl Rock transaction and create pressure for the buyout. Dyal, a multifaceted holding of Neuberger Berman Group, acquired an interest in Sixth Street’s $50 billion business in 2017 through its third unit, Dyal III. In December, however, Dyal announced a planned merger with Owl Rock Capital, a credit business that Sixth Street views as a competitor and a potential beneficiary of Dyal’s access to Sixth Street’s proprietary information. Sixth Street said in a complaint earlier this year that Dyal intended to funnel knowledge gathered from its stake in Sixth Street into the merged Dyal-Owl Rock business – to be named Blue Owl Capital Inc. – despite prohibitions in the 2017 Dyal-Sixth Street investment agreement. It sued both Dyal and Neuberger Berman. “Sixth Street’s concerns about misuse of its confidential information in the hands of a competitor are speculative at best and cannot support a preliminary injunction,” Vice Chancellor Zurn wrote. “Since filing, nothing in the record indicates Sixth Street ever actually became concerned about its confidential information. Rather, the record further undermines Sixth Street’s purported irreparable harm.” In a statement released Tuesday, Dyal said, “We’re pleased with this resounding victory. We look forward to completing our strategic combination and remain on track to do so in the first half of this year.” Dyal’s five limited partnership funds manage passive minority equity in 50 private investment businesses. General partners, controlled by Neuberger, manage the LPs, with Dyal III acquiring a passive minority stake in Sixth Street for $417 million in 2017. The deal provided Dyal with limited information rights needed to monitor its Sixth Street investment but not competitive information. Vice Chancellor Zurn said Sixth Street’s own senior executives noted the distinction while reassuring their investors about risks from the Owl Rock deal late last year, “reiterating its lack of concern on multiple occasions.” Sixth Street’s posture changed early this year, the court said, with an assertion that the Dyal-Owl Rock merger required Sixth Street’s consent in what the court concluded was an effort to force a buyback. Although Dyal offered additional assurances, Sixth Street demanded buyback of its stake for the same $417 million price paid in 2017, despite indications as early as 2018 that Sixth Street’s value had risen to $6 billion, implying a $700 million value for Dyal’s holding. During arguments in March, William Savitt of Wachtell Lipton Rosen & Katz LLP told the vice chancellor, “There’s an active, guerilla war campaign on behalf of Sixth Street to block this deal.” He said the injunction effort “confirms to us that what we’re talking about here is an attempt to get leverage to force a buyback at non economic terms, to create a windfall in Sixth Street’s favor.” A Sixth Street spokesman said Tuesday, “We entered into our agreement with the understanding that Dyal would be our partner and not our competitor. We are disappointed that Dyal and Neuberger’s unreliable narrative was the basis of today’s decision, and we will consider appropriate options. Our focus always has been and continues to be providing value for our stakeholders.” During arguments last month, Andrew Rossman of Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan LLP, counsel for Sixth Street, said, “The bedrock principle in hundreds of years of partnership law is ‘You get to pick your partner.’ That’s what this case is about.” Vice Chancellor Zurn found that Sixth Street’s effort “threatens the interests of a panoply of parties interested in the Dyal-Owl Rock transaction, “including Neuberger and Owl Rock investors who are in no way implicated in Sixth Street’s relationship with Dyal III.” The decision also noted that Sixth Street’s attorney also represented Golub Capital in its unsuccessful attempt earlier this month to block the deal in a New York state court. The court rejected all of Sixth Street’s claims, including an alleged breach of a transfer restriction in the 2017 investment agreement and tortious interference with a contract. Dyal violated none of the Sixth Street agreement’s transfer restrictions, the vice chancellor found, adding that “Sixth Street’s interpretation would have the court enjoin a transaction at any level of Dyal’s corporate pyramid, regardless of whether that entity was explicitly bound by the transfer restriction.” “Sixth Street’s concerns about misuse of its confidential information in the hands of a competitor are speculative at best and cannot support a preliminary injunction,” the vice chancellor wrote. Sixth Street Partners LP et al. are represented by Michael A. Barlow and Eliezer Y. Feinstein of Abrams & Bayliss LLP, and R. Brian Timmons, Andrew Rossman, Corey Worcester, Maaren Shah, David Mader and Kimberly Carson of Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan LLP. Dyal Capital Partners III et al. are represented by Kevin R. Shannon, Christopher N. Kelly and Daniel M. Rusk of Potter Anderson & Corroon LLP, and William Savitt, Stephen R. DiPrima, Corey J. Banks, Nathaniel D. Cullerton, Daniel H. Rosenblum and David P.T. Webb of Wachtell Lipton Rosen & Katz. Neuberger Berman Group LLC is represented by Robert S. Saunders, Sarah Runnells Martin, Jacob J. Fedechko, Susan Saltzstein and Shaud Tavakoli of Skadden Arps Slate Meagher & Flom LLP. The case is Sixth Street Partners Management Company LP et al. v. Dyal Capital Partners III (A) LP et al., case number 2021-0127, in the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware.Delaware Chancery Court Chancellor Andre Bouchard breaches his duty of loyalty to Delaware and to the United States with every corrupt breath he takes, in my opinion, folks. From what I’ve seen and heard, he doesn’t even deny some allegations that claim he is the most corrupt judge in Delaware history, and that he controls the government agency responsible for policing his possible, own wrong-doing and self-dealing. It’s so ironic, as I read the story below, that Delaware Chancery Court Chancellor Andre Bouchard would claim the ability to sit in judgment of someone being “self-dealing.” From where I sit and I’ve been watching Bouchard for years now, he is the one who is “self-dealing” in his courtroom. He’s the one dishing out judgments and incessant money, seemingly going to his old pals like Bob Pincus of Skadden Arps, and Kevin Shannon of Potter Anderson $1,425 an hour for OVER 3 years was taken from TransPerfect workers, billed by Pincus and ordered by Bouchard, and ratified by his former Skadden intern, Leo, “Me Too Claims Just a Matter of Time,” Strine. With the appearance of corrupt lawmakers operating in Delaware, apparently, it takes one suspicious actor to know another. 1,000 employees asked Governor Carney to investigate Bouchard and, following the well-established “Delaware Way,” he did nothing. Read the story below, folks and let me know if you think the same way as I do. Is Andre Bouchard really fit to hand down rulings that describe himself? What hypocrisy! Respectfully Yours, [avatar user=”Judd Bennett” size=”thumbnail” align=”left” link=”https://twitter.com/Judson_Bennett” target=”_blank”]JUDSON Bennett, CoastalNetwork.com[/avatar] Chancery Blocks Sale Of Ariz. Co. Assets Snagged By Insider By Jeff Montgomery Law360 (September 2, 2020, 9:59 PM EDT) — Citing claims of “egregious acts” of self-dealing, deception and concealment, Delaware’s chancellor late Wednesday barred the sale of tech company Array Photonics’ Arizona plant and equipment to settle costly loans and leases provided by interests of its top officer. Chancellor Andre G. Bouchard’s preliminary injunction ruling stopped the process days ahead of a potential Sept. 10 auction arranged after attempted foreclosures on loans and other Array obligations issued by or through interests of Hamid Torabi, former Array CEO and sole director. The company was formed to develop laser and photodetector systems and sensors but is now in a wind-down. Torabi, who headed the 35-employee company from 2014 until his resignation in April, was accused of arranging a series of conflicting actions that included selling to Array for nearly $8.9 million a Tempe, Arizona, plant site that he had bought two years earlier for $2.5 million. Continue Reading on Law360.comIf Former Vice President Joe Biden Doesn’t Win, Delaware Democrats Can Point the Finger at One Person: Andre Bouchard I told you so, folks! You heard it here first. You can’t go around doing, what I clearly see, as stealing $250 million and not expect to be held accountable for it! Andre Bouchard has led his band of cronies, happily, as I see it, milking a very-profitable, not-at-all “dysfunctional” and, in fact, quite successful company for millions upon millions of dollars. Did they think no one was watching? Did they think no one would see this injustice happening over the past few years? You read it here first folks and now you’re reading about this story EVERYWHERE! CBS, Bloomberg News, U.K.’s Daily Mail (see below). This story is not only getting national headlines, it’s getting international headlines and it’s being talked about as the Democratic debates are about to heat back up and Delaware’s own Joe Biden and Democratic presidential hopeful Elizabeth Warren are both part of this international story! You can’t have $250 million being siphoned off over the past few years from a very successful company without serious ramifications. While that money may have gone from TransPerfect to many lawyers associated with Andre Bouchard, and his comrades– Bob Pincus of Skadden Arps, Kevin Shannon of Potter Anderson, and Stephen Lamb of Paul Weiss — and now that missing money is now sparking a controversy the likes of which Delaware has never seen before! Folks, as I see it, we owe all of this negative attention and unflattering notoriety to Chancellor Andre Bouchard. What’s happening is Shirley Shawe, the 79-year-old shareholder at TransPerfect and mother of CEO Philip Shawe, is fighting the “Good Ole Boy’s Club” and taking on the role of an Anti-Chancery Court, Corruption activist. By doing so, she’s holding former Vice President and current 2020 Democratic Presidential candidate Joe Biden accountable for his blind support of Bouchard’s Chancery Court. This isn’t the first time she has taken on Chancery Court Corruption. Here are two examples of Shirley Shawe turning to the airwaves to fight Delaware Chancery Court corruption: I’ve been forewarning about this, pounding the table, and demanding action from the legislature for the last few years. In my opinion, Chancellor Bouchard is undermining our State’s reputation and is detrimental to our entire state economy. I applaud fellow senior-citizen Shirley Shawe for having the courage and grit to take on the establishment cronies. As always, your feedback is welcome!  

Republican businesswoman behind $500,000 Joe Biden attack ads explains she was furious he supported ‘corrupt’ Chancery Court that dissolved her business costing her millions

Political unknown Shirley Shawe paid for the TV ads in Iowa and New Hampshire to show next week Shawe shared with DailyMail.com the ad is to ‘raise public awareness to the serious issues plaguing America’s most powerful business court’ It is the largest third-party attack ad spend so far in the 2020 campaign The ad includes a 2005 exchange between then Senator Biden and Elizabeth Warren – at-the-time a Harvard professor – as they discussed bankruptcy reform But the ad dices up the dialogue between the two and suggests that they were speaking on the Chancery Court Transcripts from the hearing reveal that Biden had just misspoke and confused bankruptcy courts with the Chancery Court, a point he later clarifies Both Warren and Biden have called for the ad to be pulled from the air Shawe seems to be angry about a business dispute that impacted her son in 2015, more than ten years after the political exchange took place

By MATTHEW WRIGHT FOR DAILYMAIL.COM and KEITH GRIFFITH FOR DAILYMAIL.COM

PUBLISHED: 14:52 EDT, 29 August 2019 | UPDATED: 16:15 EDT, 29 August 2019 A Republican entrepreneur who released a perplexing ad decrying Joe Biden’s relationship with the Delaware Chancery Court has explained that she was angry at the presidential candidate for supporting the court that dissolved her business – costing her millions. Shirley Shawe told DailyMail.com that she released the misleading advert as a means to ‘raise public awareness to the serious issues plaguing America’s most powerful business court.’ ‘I was a personal victim of ageism, sexism, and corruption at the hands of Delaware Chancellor Andre Bouchard over the last five years; my constitutional rights were trampled and my private property was seized by a Delaware government body and put up for auction-and part of the justification for this was my age,’ she claimed in a statement to DailyMail.com. She added the behavior was ‘typical of the “Old Boy’s Club” that runs Delaware.’ ‘The Chancellor turned simple board deadlock into a 3 year occupation of the company I am part owner of, and caused over $250 million to be spent on the case, much of which directly benefited his social circle in Delaware. Bouchard was sworn in as Chancellor in 2014, five years after Biden ended his time as Senator of Delaware and almost a decade after the footage Shawe used in her advert. Shawe clarified that she sought to ‘encourage the candidates to drive reform’ with her ad that correctly identifies Delaware as getting an ‘F’ grade from the 2015 State Integrity Investigation that looks at ‘state government accountability and transparency.’ The ad includes a 2005 exchange between then Senator Biden and Elizabeth Warren – at-the-time a Harvard professor – as they discussed bankruptcy reform. ‘The Delaware court is too male, too white and anything but open,’ the ad’s narrator asserts in the advertisement. In the ad, Biden speaks on how the Chancery Court are open and calls it ‘outrageous’ to suggest otherwise. The clip then shows Warren ‘responding’ and seemingly pointing out how the Chancery Court impacts Delaware workers. But, the clip actually chops up Warren’s entire comment and fails to contextualize Biden’s comment – especially once he realizes that the conversation is about bankruptcy courts and not the Chancery Court. A transcript from the hearing shows that Biden realized his mistake and focused on Bankruptcy. Chancery was only ever mentioned in his initial comment. ‘Employees of companies like Enron literally cannot go to Delaware and hire local counsel, which the Delaware bankruptcy court requires of them before they can make an appearance, and that effectively cuts thousands of small employees, pensioners and local trade creditors out of the bankruptcy process,’ Warren said in the entirety of her quote. ‘If they can’t afford it, they are not there.’ Both Biden and Warren demanded the ad to be pulled, with the former Vice President declaring that the advert mischaracterized his remarks. Shawe shared that she was ‘disappointed’ by the politicians reaction but added that it was not ‘unexpected’ for Biden to respond in that way ‘given his home state court’s attempt to silence me and treat me as less than a person for years.’ She continued: ‘It is typical of the “Old Boy’s Club” that runs Delaware.’ ‘For Ms Warren, I suspect the Senator doesn’t yet fully understand how the Chancery Court harmed me and our 5000 workers worldwide. If she researches this case more deeply, I believe she will understand the facts and may have a different view.’ The Republican apparent endorsement of Warren – as seen on the ad – happens to just fall on that particular issue. Shawe said ‘who knows’ when commenting on who she would support for other issues and added that she and Warren agreed on this particular one. ‘The court needs to be brought up to 2019 and needs transparency,’ she stated. ‘I will keep fighting for that. This is just the first in a planned effort to drive awareness.’ Shawe’s grudge seems to stem from a costly legal battle that her son’s translation company, TransPerfect, fought in Delaware’s chancery court in 2015. ‘Two years after the case has ended, my company is still be billed outrageous sums per month by Skadden Arps, the Chancellor’s and the Chief Justice’s former employers,’ said the businesswoman. ‘We are required to pay these bills by court order, yet we are not allowed to see them, or even know what this work is for.’ She plans to run the television ad in early primary states Iowa and New Hampshire next week in what is the largest third-party attack ad spend so far in the 2020 presidential race. The ad eschews mainstream campaign issues and instead focus on the Chancery Court, a legal system which Shawe blames for a business dispute that hurt her son’s company. ‘The Delaware court is too male, too white and anything but open,’ the ad’s narrator intones. The 60-second ad shows Biden during a 2005 Senate hearing, in which he debated Elizabeth Warren, then a Harvard law professor. The ad accuses Biden of defending the Chancery Court as Warren attacks it. The transcript of the hearing shows that Warren was actually speaking about the bankruptcy courts, a separate forum of equity law, but Biden became briefly confused and referred to chancery court. Delaware’s Court of Chancery oversees business disputes, though not bankruptcy, which is a federal matter. The state’s chancery court has great influence due to the large number of companies that are incorporated in Delaware, which has business-friendly laws. Both Biden and Warren, who are among top contenders for the Democratic presidential nomination, have called for the ad to be pulled. ‘The ad misrepresents Vice President Biden’s position in this exchange from 2005 by manipulating footage to suggest he means one court when he means another,’ Biden campaign national press secretary Jamal Brown told CBS News in a statement. ‘It’s a clear reminder of the way that third-party money poisons our politics with false attack ads, and it has no place in this race,’ he continued. Warren also spoke out against the ad, even though it seems to cast her in a heroic light. ‘Elizabeth does not believe individual donors should have an outsized influence in this primary, and has consistently said that Super PACs or individuals with the means to finance ad campaigns on their own should stay out of the primary,’ her deputy communications director Chris Hayden said. Shawe’s grudge seems to stem from a costly legal battle that her son’s translation company, TransPerfect, fought in Delaware’s chancery court in 2015. In a landmark case, the head of the Delaware Chancery, Chancellor Andre Bouchard, ordered the dissolution of the company even though it was not in financial distress, but because its co-owners could not get along. The court-ordered decision to sell TransPerfect came in 2015 after a chancellor concluded the feuding CEO’s Philip Shawe and Elizabeth Elting were ‘hopelessly deadlocked’ over significant matters and business decisions. Shirley Shawe owned 1 percent of the company at the time of the forced sale, which resulted in her son Philip Shawe gaining ownership by bidding in the public auction. Shirley Shawe launched a crusade against the chancery courts, however, lobbying lawmakers to banned forced sales like the one of TransPerfect. ‘When a judge makes a precedent and makes a ruling to just sell a privately held company, then why would other people be motivated to start a company and why would they be motivated to incorporate in the state of Delaware? If someone is just going to take their private property?’ Shawe told WMDT-TV in 2017. Shawe has said through a spokesperson that she is a Republican and did not intend to boost Warren with her ad. She has vowed to run to run the TV ads in spite of the candidates’ protests, and has also reportedly ordered print newspaper ads on the subject.

What is a Court of Chancery?

Chancery courts began with petitions to the Lord Chancellor of England, and developed into a parallel legal system along with common law courts. Chancery dealt with issues of equity, or what is fair, rather than matters of law, and had a looser set of rules to speed to pace of proceedings. Instead of judges, they had chancellors, and had jurisdiction over trusts and estates, guardianship over children and ‘lunatics’. They also handled lawsuits requesting something other than financial damages, such as an order requiring a party to perform a specific act. Some states in the early U.S. republic replicated this dual legal system, but the two systems were merged in England in 1875. Today, the U.S. Bankruptcy Court operates as a court of equity at the federal level, and several states maintain separate court systems for matters of law and equity. Delaware, Mississippi, New Jersey, and Tennessee still make a distinction between a ‘court of law’ and chancery court.

I have sensed for years that something was rotten in the state of Delaware’s Court of Chancery, in general, but also specifically as it relates to the TransPerfect case and the missing $250 million in legal, custodian and consultant related fees. I promised my loyal readers that I would find and pull on every loose thread of this case until my perceived web of corruption that belongs to Andre Bouchard becomes totally unraveled for all to see.

This new discovery is going to floor you, and what I believe is the attempted cover up will floor you even more!

Three law firms, from my view, made out like bandits when Bouchard started ordering TransPerfect Global and CEO Phil Shawe’s personal money be paid around to his friends and former law partners like a feudal lord in mid-evil times — and remember folks, no witnesses testified against either Shawe or TransPerfect. These three firms benefited to the tune of millions of dollars whose uncanny “coincidences” and connections to Bouchard warrant a State and Federal investigation of Bouchard and his Cronies:

1. Skadden Arps – The former partner at Skadden, custodian Bob Pincus, whose personal friendship I recall Bouchard bragged about when appointing him. Also, this is where outgoing Chief Justice Strine started in law, as Bouchard’s intern.

2. Potter Anderson – Perhaps, who I believe is the dirtiest attorney in Delaware, Kevin Shannon, who seems to win cases without providing evidence by attending tax-payer financed boondoggles with Strine and Bouchard (who I hear from reliable sources that he golfed with and additionally, traveled to New Orleans with, during critical points in the case!!!)

3. Kramer Levin – Whose seemingly outrageous lies to the Delaware Supreme Court were called out in a nationally televised advertisement. What was their penalty for all of this? A victory. What’s the Bouchard connection? Kramer, Bouchard, and Kevin Shannon all worked together on the infamous Walt Disney case years ago, where they argued against shareholder interests. I have heard from reliable sources, that Gary Naftalis is a named partner at Kramer Levin who comes down to hob nob with Strine and Bouchard; sometimes he’s the only non-Delaware lawyer in attendance at a Delaware conference?

4. Paul Weiss – The fourth firm who made out like John Dillinger — and had no apparent connection to Bouchard…UNTIL NOW!!!

The Fourth Firm—HERE IS THE RUB FOLKS :

This firm, which no one has spoken about until now, in August of 2016, as reported in the New York Law Journal, Chancellor Bouchard ordered Shawe to pay Elting’s lawyers an outrageous and unconstitutional fine of $7.1 million — an order un-related to any “harm” or “compensation” in the case, as the law requires — and the largest such sanction ever in U.S. history. Bear in mind: Shawe denies all claims and has maintained his innocence at all times. All witnesses testified for Shawe–clearly stating that there was no wrong-doing of any kind. How did Paul Weiss win? Keep reading.

Paul Weiss benefits immensely — and no one made the connection before now. Why? Perhaps an orchestrated cover-up on a grand scale?

Who was the most Senior Paul Weiss lawyer in Delaware at the time? Who gained the most in the Paul Weiss DE office? You won’t believe it when I tell you: Former Chancellor Steven Lamb. Bouchard’s first firm, when he left Skadden Arps (if he ever really left – it appears to me he still might have a financial interest in their success), take a seat before reading the next line: Bouchard’s very first firm of his own was: BOUCHARD AND LAMB!!!!

You may not believe me that this is the truth, because it boggles honest minds. Folks, I have done hours of digging and digging to establish the only remaining connection of Bouchard to all the law firm benefactors of the crazy decisions in the TransPerfect case. Irrefutable proof of the Bouchard-Lamb connection is in the link:

http://www.delawaretoday.com/Delaware-Today/November-2015/The-Business-of-Law-Meet-the-New-Leader-of-the-Court-of-Chancery/

So many dots are connected here. Andre Bouchard has, in my opinion, hit for the proverbial “corruption” cycle ( a baseball term for those of you who don’t know) by helping 4 different law firms, all of which he is intimately connected to! He helped them make millions upon millions of dollars by his seemingly biased decisions from the TransPerfect Global case.

The Cover-Up!!!

Chancellor Bouchard prior to his appointment to the Chancery Court was partners with Stephen Lamb! Stephen Lamb after serving on the Chancery Court himself then moved back into private practice with the law firm of Paul Weiss. Fast forward to the TransPerfect case in 2016 and Kramer Levin hires the Paul Weiss firm to work on the case representing Shawe’s former partner at TransPerfect– Liz Elitng. Specifically, they were hired to work on the allegation that Shawe spoliated evidence which, according to the testifying employees, were NOT able to prove in any way, shape, or form. The bottom line is that nobody needs proof if Bouchard’s court is corrupt and rigged for his cronies to win?

Yet when all the papers were served on behalf of Elting by Paul Weiss, absolutely no mention was made of former Chancellor Lamb’s name. It wasn’t until I was doing some research and saw an article where Paul Weiss was claiming victory, did I notice that one of the attorneys taking credit for the victory was Stephen Lamb! No other public document I can find anywhere even lists LAMB on the TransPerfect case!!! Another coincidence?? In Bouchard’s court, there seems to be a lot of coincidences. Yet, we know from this evidence he was on the team taking Shawe’s and TransPerfect’s money with Bouchard’s help.

HELLO — They brag about his specific role on the Paul Weiss website!?!?!

I will issue a challenge to all those mentioned, who have never denied these inferences: To Chancellor Bouchard, Former Chancellor Lamb, Kevin Shannon, various Kramer Levin attorneys, who in my opinion, boldly lied to the Delaware Supreme Court with no repercussions!

COASTAL NETWORK’S CHALLENGE: Prove to me there was no cover-up and no hidden agenda. Indeed, this is the appearance of impropriety. Show me one official court document other than the Paul Weiss Web Site, that mentions LAMB’s involvement in the TransPerfect case — and I will discontinue this line of inquiry. In my opinion, Bouchard had a legal duty to inform Shawe that he was formerly in business with Chancellor Lamb, He should have recused himself, but he did not! Folks, any reasonable man would see this as a serious conflict of interest.

This is the most damning evidence of corruption, in my opinion, an investigative reporter could find, as it proves to me that this coordinated group had the intent to hide their wrong-doing. There is no other explanation from my educated perspective. How long will we let this infamous boy’s club of incestuous characters operate by sucking the life out of Delaware’s corporations, Delaware citizens, and Delaware’s reputation?! On behalf of the Coastal Network and my 6,000 readers, I again call for a bi-partisan investigation of Chancellor Andre Bouchard by the General Assembly!

Would love to hear your thoughts on this stunning discovery. Your feedback is always welcome.

As I see it, TransPerfect & Shawe never had a chance at fair trial with this what I call “murder’s row” of Bouchard’s cronies…

Scroll down to read this article:

HTTPS://WWW.PAULWEISS.COM/PRACTICES/LITIGATION/LITIGATION/NEWS/DELAWARE-SUPREME-COURT-AFFIRMS-71-MILLION-SANCTIONS-AWARD-IN-FAVOR-OF-ELIZABETH-ELTING?ID=23702


FEBRUARY 13, 2017

Delaware Supreme Court Affirms $7.1 Million Sanctions Award in Favor of Elizabeth Elting

“The Delaware Supreme Court upheld the court-ordered sale of TransPerfect Global, Inc. and unanimously affirmed the $7.1 million sanctions award in favor of Paul, Weiss client Elizabeth Elting. Elting and Phillip Shawe are the co-founders and co-CEOs of Transperfect, one of the world’s largest document-translation and discovery-services companies. Since 2014, they have been in litigation in Delaware and New York over the control of the company. Elting is represented by Kramer, Levin, Naftalis & Frankel and Potter, Anderson & Corroon in the corporate-control battle.

In late 2014, Elting tapped Paul Weiss when Shawe revealed that he had secretly accessed Elting’s lawyer-client communications. Paul Weiss then uncovered that Shawe had attempted to destroy files on his laptop, had failed to safeguard and produce text messages on his cell phone, which he claimed was destroyed when it fell in a cup of Diet Coke, and had repeatedly lied under oath about his conduct. Paul, Weiss tried the two-day sanctions hearing and represented Elting in her successful post-hearing briefs and in defending against Shawe’s sanctions appeal.

The Paul, Weiss team included litigation partners Eric Stone, Robert Atkins and Stephen Lamb, of counsel Gerard Harper and counsel Robert Kravitz.”

SEE VIDEO LINK BELOW…

My onsite coverage of the “Citizens for Pro Business Delaware” 100+ person press conference has paid off for Coastal Network readers. From an anonymous source, I have obtained a video of the entire July 10 event held right in front of Bouchard’s Chancery Court in Wilmington, Delaware.

It was an energetic and well-attended press conference, presided over by anti-corruption activist Chris Coffey, the campaign manager of “Citizens for Pro Business Delaware.” Others spoke too, including Donna White, an African-American woman who was terminated from her job at the Chancery Court for sending an email asking if Mark Zuckerburg would look at her App!!?? Meanwhile Kevin Shannon and Chancellor Andre Bouchard golf together during the case, travel to New Orleans together during the case, and I believe decided this case at the Country Club. It certainly wasn’t decided in the court room with no witnesses appearing for Shannon’s side, folks. That’s how I clearly see it.

As Coffey puts it, Bouchard and his cronies in the Delaware Old Boys Club “get away with murder” each and every day compared to what Donna White did, yet she was escorted out of the building and treated like a criminal–given only 10 minutes to collect her belongings and to say goodbye to co-workers of 7 years!?!

The double standard, hypocrisy, and potential racism here only rivals the ageism, sexism and contempt that Chancellor Bouchard and 4 out of 5 justices on the Supreme Court (all the male judges) showed litigant Shirley Shawe in the TransPerfect debacle. How could it be that female, senior citizen, Shirley Shawe’s only victory in the first 5 years of this entire case was from a woman jurist, Delaware Supreme Court Justice Valihura? It’s mathematically impossible that this is a coincidence, as the Good Ole Boy cronies would have us believe. They are making millions off innocent shareholders with their back-room Country Club deal, scratching each other’s backs, and trading favors with their rich and powerful friends. And what happens to Chancery’s real life victims like Donna White? She has been denied health insurance and unemployment benefits! I’m telling you folks, I believe Andre Bouchard is not only corrupt, but also sadistic–and, in any case, lacks any shred of the ethical fiber required to fill the Chancellor position. The great state of Delaware deserves better. Listen to the press conference, where Donna takes the podium and tells her story here…

https://videopress.com/v/xHHMEsRd?preloadContent=metadata

I asked a question of Coffey during the press conference, which I wrote about in my last column. You will see that here, as well as other suggested anti-corruption reforms that appear like common sense to this journalist. The Delaware Citizens group now fighting for reform has 2,700 members which includes TransPerfect employees who were negatively impacted by Bouchard’s decisions along with other concerned Delawareans.

By the way, I commend the Delaware Business Times for covering the major events of July 10th, and I wonder which Ole Boys Club member or creepy Skadden Arps friend of Bouchard called the News Journal to get them to kill the story? Brent Celek from the Philadelphia Eagles and Colin Jost from Saturday Night Live came to Wilmington and joined those calling for Chancery reform at the Hotel DuPont. How is it you can Google the News Journal’s entire site, and read nothing about this important day at the Chancery Court? Mark my words, Bouchard and the “Limousine Liberals” who run this state and prey on its citizens are powerful, so powerful, they are dangerous to Delaware, to anyone who incorporates here. But fear not, the Coastal Network cannot be intimidated into killing stories or masking the truth–stay tuned here folks, for coverage on Chancery actions and other injustices in Delaware.

As of press time, I know of no other media outlet who has obtained this tape. Enjoy watching the coverage and share it with folks who may want to see it.

https://videopress.com/v/xHHMEsRd?preloadContent=metadata

I had the unique experience of covering an unusual day for Delaware and the Coastal Network, on Wednesday, July 10, in Wilmington, Delaware. It involved a rousing and heavily attended press conference, a fascinating hearing in the Court of Chancery with Andre Bouchard presiding, and a fabulous party and TransPerfect summer celebration at the Hotel DuPont later that night. The activities began about 12:30 PM with a Press Conference — in 90 degree heat that felt like 105 degrees with unbelievable humidity — in front of the Delaware Court of Chancery which was organized by the “Citizens for Pro Business Delaware.” This group, led by articulate activist Chris Coffey, has 2,700 members, made up of TransPerfect employees who were negatively impacted by Bouchard’s decisions along with other concerned Delaware citizens. The group now appears to be dedicated to making changes to modernize the controversial rules governing Delaware’s Chancery Court. Having covered the TransPerfect case for years, and Andre Bouchard for even longer, I was pleased to take the opportunity to observe all these players face off live and in person. During the press conference on the front lawn of the Chancery Court, yours truly, like a dummy, chose to wear a dark suit — and the Delaware establishment almost had their wish for my complete demise, as I was about to pass out from the heat. Weather and wardrobe aside, I was extremely impressed with Coffey’s platform and passion. It is unquestionable that this group shares my desire for increased transparency in the Court of Chancery, as they are proposing much needed common sense reforms. In my opinion, the legislature cannot act quickly enough to decrease perceived (or actual) corruption surrounding the Court’s activities. The obscene and disgraceful court-ordered looting of TransPerfect continues!!! Skadden Arps gets paid more in a month for secretive and undisclosed “legal services” than normal people make in a year. It appears to me that Skadden and the judges are truly modern day Pharaohs, living extravagantly off the sweat of the thousands of innocents. I believe without a doubt that these (potentially, colluding, former law partners, “Bouchard and Strine”, both Skadden alumni) are truly a biblical plague on Delaware’s reputation. During Bouchard’s tenure, our once-great state has dropped to a dismal 48th out of our 50 U.S. states in overall business confidence, and after 15 years as the undisputed #1 in business litigation, we fell to #11. I challenged Coffey with the following direct question, “Sir, do you think the fact that Chancellor Bouchard engaged in “boondoggle”, travel excursions with one-side’s attorney during the decision-making phase of the TransPerfect case actually created a conflict of interest and an appearance of an impropriety?” Coffey’s answer was firm and unequivocal, “Absolutely-YES!” Folks, for those of you that couldn’t hear Chris Coffey’s speech live, I am telling you his answer and his entire speech sounded statesman-like and remarkably credible. I believe this group represents the best chance Delaware has for reform, positive change, and a fresh start — but, they must defeat a well- off Bouchard and his establishment, “good old boys” club to get it done. Make no mistake, there will be a significant battle for Delaware’s; future playing out in the 2020 election! Buckle up!!! I then observed the Chancery Court argument. Former TransPerfect co-CEO Elizabeth Elting’s attorneys (after Bouchard handed them a $400 million check) are arguing for another $200,000. With each side lawyered up, according to the TransPerfect employees I interviewed at the Court House, this hearing will cost over $500,000 for each litigant. What judge allows $1 million to be spent to argue over $200,000??? So again, I expect payola is responsible for why this Chancellor would even have this hearing at all. In my view, it might be because his lawyer buddies could bank yet another payday on the backs of the dedicated, TransPerfect employees. It’s shameful and disgraceful!!! In a packed courtroom, with many TransPerfect employees who believe they are all victims of Bouchard’s corruption staring at the Chancellor, I had two observations worth mentioning that won’t be found in any other transcript: 1) Bouchard appeared judicial and didn’t even resort to his biased name-calling. 2) His best pal Kevin Shannon of Potter Anderson said ABSOLUTELY NOTHING and left via a secret exit to avoid my questioning. If someone hadn’t seen Bouchard in action before this hearing, they may have mistaken him for actually being an ethical judge on this specific day. I guess when there are a courtroom full of antagonistic folks staring you down, it must engender self-reflection. Like the many TransPerfect employees, I will wait for the ruling — but having seen Bouchard’s judicial antics for years, I’m not sure this subjective Judge will ever rule against his best buddy, Kevin Shannon, no matter what facts are presented. Then the fun began with a huge TransPerfect party with a fancy sit-down dinner at the Hotel DuPont. At least 300 people packed the place to celebrate that TransPerfect had survived Bouchard’s “DISSOLUTION” order, and despite these trials and tribulations, is still doing quite well as a company. (Never did their revenue slow, not even during the case.) Besides TransPerfect employees, participants included concerned Delaware citizens, a great band, the winning legal team ( including Alan Dershowitz), Villanova basketball star Kris Jenkins, Super Bowl Champion Philadelphia Eagles tight end Brent Celek, Cindy Green – Registrar of Wills office in Sussex County, Delaware Senator Colin Bonini, Sam Waltz of The Delaware Business Times, and to top it all off, a great show by Saturday Night Live star Colin Jost. TransPerfect CEO Philip Shawe gave a gracious speech, praising all of his employees for their dedication and loyalty. Without a doubt, this man has earned the love and respect of an army of people over his 27 years in business. No one should spend their whole life building a company, and have court corruption seize it and try to auction it off to a competitor. These employees were great, happy, and thankful to still have jobs. During the evening, it really hit home to me how much Bouchard’s obvious lies and defamatory name-calling must have hurt these families over the Chancery’s 5-year occupation of TransPerfect. Bouchard called these hard-working normal folks “Dysfunctional” — In my view, this grotesque misrepresentation, was made so he could take over the company and enrich his friends. Its just unacceptable!!! Make no mistake folks, what happened to TransPerfect in Delaware wouldn’t even happen in Russia — it’s disgusting. Regardless, I saw a company on Wednesday night that had overcome perceived corruption, while keeping the American Dream alive for themselves, and hopefully for entrepreneurs all over the world. Delaware’s business future however, will be in the hands of our Elected Officials. Lastly and on a personal note, it was gratifying for me, as I was actively acknowledged by the employees — many who felt they were silenced and oppressed by Chancellor Bouchard and Skadden Arps Custodian Bob Pincus. They felt that I have helped give them a voice through my reporting. I told them I am honored to shine a light on injustice and corruption, and that I will continue to do so for my readers. As always your comments are welcome and appreciated. Yours truly, JUDSON Bennett-Coastal Network

Why have evidence or witnesses to make your case in Delaware’s $250 million TransPerfect fiasco? When your name is Kevin Shannon, and your friends are wearing the robes, in my opinion, you don’t need evidence or witnesses — cause you have the game rigged in your favor.

If this isn’t illegal, it surely ought to be. Frankly, I see this as a disgusting and disturbing view into how our Chancery Court apparently now works?

After following Andre Bouchard’s first couple of years, which I viewed as suspect, followed by his mismanagement of the TransPerfect Global case, I decided to Google the names of the folks involved in the case to see if my suspicions were correct. Were there actual conflicts of interest and personal connections?

Folks, please look at the boondoggling schedule I was able to come up with by doing that digging on Google: Kevin Shannon of Potter Anderson, with Andre Bouchard (well-documented BFF) and Leo Strine, in and around the 5 years of shame related to the TransPerfect case.

I could write a serious diatribe about how corrupt this appears to be, just by referencing the Delaware Judicial Cannons, which are clear and on point, but I will let the dates and facts speak for themselves. How dumb these people must think the Delaware public is??!

Potter AndersonFolks, after looking at the facts, it is hard to fathom for me — and should be for any reasonable person — when seeing the incestuous relationships between these individuals and their conflicts of interest, that this judicial arrangement, which apparently is condoned by the Delaware Legislature, is just plain wrong!!! 

To add insult to injury, for Bouchard and Strine, this boondoggling is on the tax- payers’ dime.

Look for yourself:

Shannon / Bouchard / Strine Boondoggle Calendar

(and these are just the one’s we know about from Google?!?)

 


 

Berkley Boondoggle – Sept. 18, 2018

Shannon, Strine, and Bouchard

 


 

New Orleans Boonboggle – March 15, 2018

Shannon, Strine, and Bouchard

 


 

Berkley Boondoggle – Oct. 26, 2017

Shannon and Strine

 


 

New Orleans Boondoggle – March 17, 2016

Shannon, Strine, and Bouchard

 


 

Chicago Boondoggle – April 29, 2016

Shannon and Strine (and only 2 others)

 


 

Delaware Dinner – Dec. 5, 2014

Shannon, Strine, and Voss (works with Pincus at Skadden)

 


 

Boston Boondoggle – Nov. 13, 2013

Shannon and Strine

 


 

Re-living the Disney Case – May 16, 2018

Bouchard and Shannon’s Co-Counsel on the TransPerfect Case, Kramer Levin (Gary P. Naftalis) – The only non-Delaware person – Wonder why he was so motivated to come down?

 


 

There you have it folks — clear evidence of these incestuous connections and when you put these relationships together with the actions of the same players combined with the rulings from Bouchard and Strine and then add the former business partner from Skadden Arps, Robert Pincus, into the mix as the appointed Custodian in the TransPerfect case, all working in unison to seemingly profit from the case. I cringe at the obvious appearances of impropriety and the possible corruption. There should be no doubt about the integrity of these Courts. Unfortunately, they are suspect and it is right in our faces!

I urge you to contact your legislators and tell them about your concerns! This will be an issue in the 2020 election.

Breaking news folks, in a recent survey released by Slingshot Strategies LLC, confirms what I have been reporting on for years. There are a large number of Delaware voters who are dissatisfied with Andre Bouchard’s Chancery Court. Importantly, 79% of Delawareans believe Andre Bouchard should have been forced to disclose his pre-existing, 20-year BFF friendship with TransPerfect Global co-founder, Elting’s counsel, Kevin Shannon of Potter Anderson.

Additionally, the Delaware citizenry apparently agrees that conflicts of interest clearly exposed, not sealed up by a judge who could be abusing his power, in regard to the appointments of custodians. Bottom line folks, the Delaware people, in my opinion and in my assessment of these poll results, are not happy with Andre Bouchard and the rampant cronyism that has defined his tenure.

Recently, folks demanding greater transparency from Bouchard in his Chancery Court at a Bar Association Brunch were forced to leave by security, not only the event itself, but the parking lot as well. Is this the Chancellor’s latest bid to thwart activities protected by the United States Constitution?

Frankly, these poll results are unfortunately gratifying in a way because, in my opinion, a vast majority of Delawareans believe that Bouchard’s shady, illogical rulings in the TransPerfect case — supported by his former intern Leo Strine — in a nonsensical majority opinion — are improper. Our once-renowned Chancery Court is now infamous for corruption in my opinion.

Delaware, having dissipated from #1 to #11 for judicial equity in a national survey conducted last year by the United States Chamber of Commerce — is losing corporations to Nevada because many business people are concerned about potential subjective rulings coming out of Delaware’s Chancery Court these days?

Yes folks, having watched Chancellor Bouchard very closely from the time he was appointing various people to the Deputy of the Register of Wills job (before he found one that could actually do the job), having read all the transcripts from the TransPerfect case, and having interviewed many people, I am convinced beyond a shadow of doubt, the longer Bouchard holds office, the worse off Delaware will be.

Please read the article below published by Yahoo Finance, citing “widespread dissatisfaction” with Bouchard’s Chancery Court.

Survey Reveals Widespread Dissatisfaction With The Delaware Chancery Court

A recent poll shows that Delaware voters align with Citizens for a Pro-Business Delaware in their crusade for transparency in the Delaware Chancery Court

DOVER, Del., June 24, 2019 /PRNewswire/ — A staggering amount of Delaware citizens have expressed dissatisfaction with the Chancery Court’s proposed reforms and the state government’s transparency, according to a recent survey.

The survey, released in April by Slingshot Strategies, LLC., noted 79% of Delawarevoters and 77% of registered Democrats demand judges to disclose relationships with lawyers. In addition, about 70% of both Delaware voters and registered Democrats propose custodians to disclose conflicts of interests to the general public. The sweeping support for additional disclosure from the Chancery Court is heavily linked to the overwhelming frustration citizens have for the state government.

According to the survey, 92% of voters agree that the state government is dishonest and 58% believe it is nearly impossible to hold local politicians accountable for their actions. Almost 50% feel helpless in the fight for their voices and concerns to be addressed, due to political bias and nepotism in Delaware politics.

Citizens for a Pro-Business Delaware have demanded more transparency, equity, accountability and freedom of speech from the Chancery Court, only to be denied such basic Constitutional rights. On June 14, 2019, Citizens for a Pro-Business Delaware volunteers were forcibly removed from the Delaware Chancery Court after using their First Amendment rights to request transparency. While the group was denied the right to distribute information to those most closely associated with the Court system, Citizens for a Pro-Business Delaware will continue to bring their push for accountability to the residents of Delaware through media advertisements in the News Journal, as well as other local media.

Influential leaders such as Chancellor Bouchard halt Delaware Chancery Court reform and Delaware’s reputation as a hub for headquarters and businesses are being negatively affected. Citizens for a Pro-Business Delaware is committed to exposing the clandestine processes of Delaware’s Chancery Court. “The long-standing corruption and white washing of justice in the Delaware Chancery Court is abhorrent and unethical,” said Miranda Wessinger, president of the Citizens for a Pro-Business Delaware. “The citizens of Delaware deserve transparency and accountability from local political leaders. Our efforts to serve the Delaware people will not be impeded, regardless of the bureaucratic push back. We are determined to keep Delaware’s reputation as a thriving and profitable business state.”

Citizens for a Pro-Business Delaware is a group made up of more than 2,700 members including employees of the global translation services company TransPerfect, as well as concerned Delaware residents, business executives and others. They formed in April of 2016 to focus on raising awareness with Delaware residents, elected officials, and other stakeholders about the issue.

While their primary goal of saving the company has been accomplished, they continue their efforts to fight for more transparency in the Delaware Chancery Court. For more information on Citizens for a Pro-Business Delaware or to join the cause, visit DelawareForBusiness.org.

As I’m seeing fines and other crazy headlines roll in against law firm Skadden Arps, I can’t help but reflect on some of the injustices that happened in the TransPerfect Global case. The injustice jumps right out at me when I think about it in light of these new Skadden Arps developments. Let me tell you the latest and let’s see if it jumps out at you too! Delaware Chancery Court Chancellor Andre Bouchard, a former lawyer from Skadden Arps, an international law firm accused of criminal activity, AND recently fined $4.6 million, ruled subjectively and totally against TransPerfect CEO Philip Shawe in favor of his buddy Kevin Shannon, who represented the plaintiff, Elizabeth Elting, Shawe’s former partner. During the trial, and without evidence, Bouchard wrongly fined Shawe $7.1 million and awarded $1.4 million in legal fees, which were un-substantiated, to his good friend Kevin Shannon who I believe he potentially colluded with during the decision making period of the trial while in a forum together in New Orleans. Bouchard also appointed his former partner Robert Pincus (another Skadden Arps attorney) as the Custodian of TransPerfect, who then, in my view, ripped off the company to the tune of over $25 million — an unprecedented amount of money, again without substantiation or itemized consideration — all approved by Chancellor Bouchard. Then of course we have the appeal upheld by Delaware Chief Supreme Court Justice, Leo Strine, despite the fact the whole deal was an illegal “TAKING” under the 5th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution! Guess what? Leo Strine is another former Skadden Arps attorney! Chancellor Bouchard refuses to release the billings to the Public because, in my opinion, he is afraid of what might be established and perceived. As another aside, Paul Manafort, former Trump campaign manager, could probably get 19 years in prison for unrelated, process crimes created by the fact that a false document was filed, yet Skadden Arps only receives a $4.6 million dollar fine and a slap on the wrist to boot, for what I consider an outrageous illegal activity! There’s a HUGE INEQUITY here, folks! Skadden Arps could be corrupt in my opinion, and as I see it, possibly all of these Delaware attorneys (former Skadden Arps guys) could be corrupt as well. Could there be huge kickbacks to all concerned here?? It is all far too cute and convenient, and yes incestuous, for my comfort. Folks if there was ever the appearance of an impropriety, this is definitely one! And it needs to be investigated! I call for the FBI and the Department of Justice to start an immediate investigation, as federal crimes could have been purloined here? It looks to me as if the State of Delaware is protecting its own, so the feds need to get involved! How is it that Manafort goes to jail, while Skadden Arps escapes with a fine that is a drop in the bucket of their billions in revenue?! All while Bouchard, Pincus, and Strine — along with Kevin Shannon — could possibly be laughing all the way to an offshore-island bank ? WHERE IS JUSTICE, WHERE IS EQUITY? In my view there is no justice anymore in the State of Delaware! Shame! TIME FOR THE FEDS TO GET INVOLVED?! Please look over excerpts from the articles below to glean this nefarious information and background.  
   

New York Times — January 17, 2019

“WASHINGTON — A global New York-based law firm has agreed to pay $4.6 million to settle a Justice Department investigation into whether its work for a Russia-aligned Ukrainian government violated lobbying laws.

The investigation stems from work that the firm, Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom, did with Paul Manafort, President Trump’s former campaign chairman. The case overlaps with the investigation of the special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III, into Russian interference in the 2016 election.

As part of the settlement, the law firm agreed to register retroactively as a foreign agent for Ukraine in addition to paying the government $4.6 million, representing the money it earned from its work in Ukraine.

The settlement between the firm and the Justice Department, which was made public on Thursday, is the latest indication that Mr. Mueller’s inquiry and related investigations are fundamentally challenging the lucrative but shadowy foreign-lobbying industry that has thrived in Washington.

 
 

AXIOS — February 15,2019

 

Prosecutors for special counsel Robert Mueller said in a new court filing that President Trump’s former campaign manager Paul Manafort should serve between 19.5 and 24.5 years in prison for the financial crimes for which he was convicted in a Virginia court last August.

“In the end, Manafort acted for more than a decade as if he were above the law, and deprived the federal government and various financial institutions of millions of dollars. The sentence here should reflect the seriousness of these crimes, and serve to both deter Manafort and others from engaging in such conduct.”

Why it matters: This would essentially be a life sentence for the 69-year-old Manafort. He is also facing a separate case in D.C., where a judge recently ruled that he had violated his plea agreement with Mueller and could therefore lose out on any potential leniency he might be offered.

 
 

NEW YORK TIMES — February 2, 2018

“Mr. Mueller’s inquiry threatens the delicate balance that Skadden has struck between lucrative sources of revenue. The firm has made huge profits from corporate work for image-conscious United States companies, while also representing riskier international clients, such as Russian oligarchs and companies with close ties to President Vladimir V. Putin and former Soviet states.

Skadden’s work advising controversial foreign clients was probably prompted by the same aggressive risk-taking that fueled the firm’s rise from scrappy upstart to top-grossing legal giant with a range of practice areas, said Lincoln Caplan, a research scholar at Yale Law School and the author of “Skadden: Power, Money, and the Rise of a Legal Empire.”

“The mentality is that Skadden wouldn’t be afraid of doing something like this, if there was a chance to utilize their skills and status to take advantage of what sounds like a very lucrative business, and they saw no legal or ethical proscription against their taking on the matter,” he said.

Skadden’s work is part of a trend in recent years of lobbyists and lawyers earning increasingly larger paydays by marketing their connections in Washington to foreign politicians, countries and companies willing to pay hefty fees to burnish their reputations in the United States and on the international stage

The recent article I posted concerning the law firm “Skadden Arps” getting fined by the feds a staggering $4.6 million dollars for illegally acting as a foreign agent (in my view, Skadden was aiding treason!) in relation to the Delaware’s Chancellor Andre Bouchard, Delaware’s Chief Justice of the Supreme Court Leo Strine, and the appointed (by Bouchard) Custodian at TransPerfect, Robert Pincus — who are all ex-Skadden lawyers.   It’s so incestuous, it stinks to high heaven! The rulings in favor of Kevin Shannon by Bouchard, when Shannon could not call a single fact witness, the upholding by Strine on appeal of the main case (and the largest individual sanction in the U.S. was affirmed on appeal without even a hearing!!!), and the billing by Pincus of TransPerfect to the tune of over $25 million, which is simply outrageous, brings this judicial outrage to another level entirely. TransPerfect Global CEO Philip Shawe was ordered to make TransPerfect pay $25 million in fees, but not Shawe, nor the public, nor anyone else gets to examine the bills. Neither the public, nor the payer (TransPerfect) gets to know what was paid for, or if this $25 million was legitimately billed… absolute insanity folks!   To go from the ridiculous to the obscene, we then have Kevin Shannon, Bouchard’s best buddy — who Bouchard hand-picked to join the St. Francis Hospital Board after he vacated his board seat. because he became the Chief Chancellor (without 1 day of bench experience, by the way) — got awarded $1.4 million in legal fees, also without any documentation, nor disclosure to the public!   Why wouldn’t a law firm, fined $4.6 million by the Feds for serious crimes, pad their bills to the moon??! Since there was no disclosure by Bouchard and no way to check if the bills were valid, just pay, pay, pay to Bouchard’s Delaware cronies whatever they ask. They scratched his back to become the Chancellor, now I think he is scratching theirs? Folks, is that how this is supposed to work? In my opinion, it reeks of corruption.   Again, I received an overwhelming response from the public about my last story of a 4-year injustice that would not have been tolerated in any third-world country, and damn sure should not be tolerated here. I say to you absurd cronies in the judiciary: You can fool people only so long, and then they start screaming from the tops of mountains! You are being exposed for suspicious activities, and if my readership has its way, you’ll be held accountable for these apparent improprieties.   Bouchard holds half the documents in the entire case, and ALL of his friend’s $26.4 million in non-itemized bills wrapped up tight as a drum, and he refuses to release them to the public. Why? Because they could possibly incriminate him or his cronies? There is a high price to pay if you line your pockets with court-ordered money from private citizens. I wonder why Bouchard and Skadden Arps appear in my opinion to act above the law in Delaware and apparently continue to get away with it? Or are they?? Based on your feedback, it’s clear this cabal is finally being exposed and the folks are beginning to understand this disconcerting reality??   Bouchard’s continued actions and failure to disclose documents to the public have cast a doubt on Delaware’s credibility, while destroying our business-friendly image — and negatively impacting our economy, plus casting a darker shadow over the First State’s once-honorable and respected institution, our Chancery Court.   As I often do when a story generates such significant outrage that something must be done, I have cut-and-pasted a sampling below from the many responses I have received. (The last names have been removed to protect these citizens from possible reprisals.)   Please enjoy the comments and please keep them coming! I appreciate your feedback.  
 

1) From Dawn

Thanks for expanding my mind and understanding of Delaware politics through the TransPerfect debacle… eye-opening. Keep up the good work!

2) From Allen

IMPEACH BOUCHARD!

3) From John

Jud, It is extremely disconcerting to realize the incestuous connections between the Skadden Arps law firm, Justice Strine, Chancellor Bouchard, Robert Pincus — then the cute relationship between Kevin Shannon and our Chancellor. I wouldn’t put anything past these rotten bastards. Skadden Arps is corrupt and it sure makes me wonder about Bouchard’s integrity. The records must be released. How come Shawe has not sued to have then released through a “Freedom of Information Request”? Thanks for your outstanding work in bringing all of this to light. You should get a Pulitzer award! All the best!

 

4) From Linda

OUTRAGEOUS!!!! Where there is smoke there is fire. Bouchard is a disgrace to judicial integrity. Love your articles, Judson.

 

5) From Peter

JUDSON — This is an extraordinary situation and most disturbing. Nobody should ever have to worry that our Chancery Court could be corrupt.

6) From Carol

Hi Jud, This is beyond an impropriety. Here we have a corrupt law firm (Skadden Arps) and then Strine, Bouchard, Pincus all from the same law firm. They should make a movie about this crazy situation. Everybody is way too cozy in the Delaware Judiciary. I know we have a small state, but come on. Wow — is all I can say!

7) From Don

Hey JUDSON, Read your article and this one really is impactful. You made your point big time. Corrupt law firm, fined $4.6 million by the Justice department and the head of the Delaware Supreme Court and the head of the Chancery are from the same law firm? Bouchard’s handling of the TransPerfect case has been terrible and now he is preventing documents from being given out to the public? This guy at the best should be removed as Chancellor and at the worst should not be reappointed. Hope you will be around to testify when that time comes ! Keep up the great work. Your political articles are amazing, but this TransPerfect stuff is sensational.

 

8) From Erin

Great stuff JUD. What an excellent article and expose of Andre Bouchard. He has got to go. Keep up the great work!

 

9) From John C.

JUDSON, It’s a Simple answer: Absolute arrogance and greed!

 

10) From Eric R.

You are a loose cannon stirring the pot! As your wife Maria used to say as you stomped your feet up the stairs to your office, “Who are you gonna piss off now, Judson?” Keep it up, we know you are right and appreciate your guts. Love you, brother!

11) From Eric B.

I really enjoyed your article. Thanks for continuing to peel off the layers of deceit manufactured by Bouchard. I feel sorry for Mr. Shawe and anyone else that has to come before Bouchard’s kangaroo court.

Breaking News, folks: Elizabeth Elting’s attorney Kevin Shannon of Potter Anderson has made a new filing in the TransPerfect Global case. The filing allows his best buddy (you guessed it), Chancellor Andre Bouchard, to sink his tentacles into TransPerfect’s company coffers and possibly get the payola flowing out, once again! If the love of money is the root of all evil, Shannon and Bouchard are in my opinion its richest fertilizer. This story truly seems to have no end!    If you want to understand what I personally consider the colluding crooks of the Delaware Court system (Shannon & Bouchard) are up to now, stay tuned to the Coastal Network. I believe I am uniquely positioned, having earned the trust of more sources on the inside than any other commentator.   From what I have been told, I believe their latest scam to enrich themselves and their friends will shock your consciousness. First, I ask, why after having closed the case and after TransPerfect having fled our jurisdiction to Nevada to escape perceived corruption, is the Chancellor so eager to rip open old wounds and get TransPerfect back in his cross hairs? As they say on Wall Street, it’s about money and greed for certain corrupt Delaware elites.   I will explain Shannon’s apparent scam in a nutshell, as verified by multiple sources within the company. As part of the deal (or more accurately, what I see as state-sponsored blackmail), in order to keep the company he built, my understanding is that Bouchard made Shawe provide legal protection (known as “indemnity”) to Elting for wrongdoing related to lawsuits against her by former employees. Because of this, Elting’s team now seems to have no downside, so she (or more accurately, her bill-happy lawyers: Kramer Levin in New York, Potter Anderson in Delaware) appear to be working to sabotage the cases for which they are co-defendants with Shawe and TransPerfect.    Shawe and TransPerfect will have to be responsible by order of Chancellor Bouchard. Based on the contract with the Chancery Court, Shawe and his company TransPerfect Global has to handle Elting’s defense. Rather than sit back and enjoy their $385 million and 100% protection and “indemnity” that Bouchard forced Shawe to provide, Elting’s lawyers seem to be trying to make a mockery of theses cases and drive up their own legal bills (which will have to be paid by TransPerfect!), and keep on fighting in front of Bouchard. As I see it, because of Shannon’s perceived special relationship with Bouchard, they must feel they have no downside in sabotaging other litigations for which Shawe is paying the bill?   If you think I’m off base about how excited Bouchard was to get this wildly-successful company to start subsidizing legal time-meters all over the world once again, wait until you hear this: From what I heard, Shannon made a motion asking for permission to keep the case going, with extra pages (more pages equals more money for Shannon, less money for TransPerfect employees), and hold on to your hats, as I have heard from multiple reliable sources… Bouchard GRANTED Shannon’s motion to keep the fight going in the Chancery Court within 3 hours!!! (Chancellor, you could have at least pretended to be objective and not given the appearance that you and Shannon are colluding and coordinating behind the scenes. Perception is key, especially in this case. You couldn’t have possibly even READ the motion as fast as you granted it?!)   Now what’s worse than Bouchard having his clerks (who I have heard lie in wait for cushy Skadden jobs) standing ready to auto-approve Kevin Shannon’s every request, as he did for nearly 4 years? What’s worse than our Chancellor, who by his suspicious actions, could be betraying his sworn oaths and duties as a judge? What’s worse than a judge granting such windfalls to the side with zero witnesses to purposefully make settlement impossible? And what is worse than having, in my view, a Chancellor destroy Delaware’s business image and rankings (Dropping from #1 to #11) just to enrich his cronies? What’s worse? Watching Bouchard and his cronies gear up to seemingly milk it all over again??   Lawmakers, wake up and smell what I believe is the corruption in the Delaware Chancery! How pungent must the stench of Bouchard’s crazy operation be before you act, I ask? In my view, and in the view of countless other Delawareans who have written into my Coastal Network, Bouchard’s Chancery Court has morphed from a once widely respected institution, to what seems to me to be a corrupt third-world Kangaroo Court. TransPerfect would have gotten a fairer shake by suing Putin in Moscow. Wake up and pass reforms that will oust or limit the power of what I think is a Manchurian Candidate of a Chancellor, drunk with power.   In my view, this man is a menace to what the Delaware Court of Chancery is supposed to be about, which is equity and fairness! I believe no judiciary purporting to be honorable and running a clean shop would, could, or should allow him a seat at the table, much less, at the head of the table. It looks to me that Bouchard views the Chancery Court as a place not to ensure that justice is done, or to maintain Delaware’s reputation for business fairness, vested in him by the legislature, but as a personal play-thing, where he can make crazy, unprecedented, and unpredictable rulings that hurt 4,000 working families, just to enrich a few of his cronies, and the Chancellor apparently has no cozier crony, than his old, dear friend Kevin Shannon of Potter Anderson.   Stay tuned for more coverage. It seems at the moment that I’m the only correspondent with the inside scoop here. Either way, I promise to bring the citizens of Delaware the truth that no one else will.    Please click on the link below to read the article from “Crain’s”:   https://www.crainsnewyork.com/features/despite-bitter-battle-ownership-control-transperfect-remains-countrys-top-translation-firmFor the those of you who haven’t watched “Game of Thrones” on television and aren’t eagerly awaiting the final season in April on HBO, perhaps I can explain this analogy. King Joffrey is a fictional character, who is the product of incest. He is corrupt to the core, and willing to do anything to vanquish his enemies. His ascent to the throne was illegitimate. He tortures innocent people for his own amusement. He is a pathological liar and abuses his power in unspeakable ways to better his own position and his allies. He is all powerful; everyone fears him, so they tell him what he wants to hear (versus the truth), and all the kingdom’s subjects truly know he’s not the man for the job, but are powerless to drive change. Other than being a product of incest, which I can’t opine on, in my opinion, Chancellor Bouchard is the spitting image of King Joffrey. I’m glad TransPerfect Global and its CEO Philip Shawe were willing to demand trial by combat, a Game of Thrones reference, and win a victory not only over Bouchard, but the cadre of, in my personal view, the many suspicious sycophants, he surrounds himself with such as (Bob Pincus, his former partner at Skadden Arps; Kevin Shannon, his BFF; and Leo Strine, his former Intern at Skadden Arps). Let’s hope Delaware is not powerless to stop this apparently sadistic man who, since he ran the Judicial Nominating committee, and used to employ Leo Strine, the Chief Justice, should in my opinion, have never been given this appointment. Just to give you some background and an outrageous example, Bouchard wanted to give his friend Kevin Shannon and his client (former TransPerfect Global co-CEO Elizabeth Elting) an artificial leg up in the case. I have read over 5,000 pages of the transcripts in great detail. Take my word for it, it’s all lawyer lies and hyperbole — sad — and all designed to make this $650 million industry-leader look unusual — Why? I believe it was so Chancellor Bouchard could justify using TransPerfect’s company coffers as a conduit to enrich his pals beyond belief. When I think about the $250 MILLION (verified by Crain’s Business magazine) that Bouchard ordered private U.S. citizens to spend, just to seemingly benefit his cronies, it truly makes me nauseated. There was nothing wrong with this corporation, except for a 50% passive shareholder and scorned woman (Elting) who wanted out – and I think this Chancellor saw a huge opportunity knocking to use his position to feather all his friend’s nests and I am sure his own as well. What would a non-corrupt judge have done? Elting could have sold HER shares, even with a Custodian. But the rub is, half of a company (Elting’s share) wasn’t worth as much as 50% of the whole company — so seeking to enrich his pals, Bouchard embarked on a non-sensical judicial result: the most long, arduous, illogical, expensive, ripe for abuse, tortuous to 4,000 employees, a government run public auction from a successful private company — which is without precedent in America. To do this, Bouchard performed an illegal taking (contrary to the Takings Clause of the 5th Amendment) of Philip and Shirley Shawe’s stock (50% of TransPerfect) and put their private property up for sale, against their will, at the same time, to give Kevin Shannon’s clients a windfall. So, Bouchard then seemingly makes up an endless series of outrageous lies to justify what I believe is the biggest business theft in American history, courtesy of the Delaware Chancery Court and its cronies. You might say, well Shawe bought it anyway at the public auction, so no harm no foul — Philip and Shirley Shawe got to keep their property. If you believe blackmail is a proper activity for Delaware judges to engage in, you would have a point. Bouchard pitted Shawe’s bidding against his largest competitor, HIG-Lionbridge, an off-shorer of U.S. jobs — so in effect, Bouchard extorted Philip Shawe into over-paying, as this was the only way Shawe could save 2,700 American jobs and keep his company. Back to what I believe, based on the evidence, is that the Chancellor outrageously misrepresented the facts. Much to Bouchard’s disappointment, the law and the constitution prevents him from issuing a fine without a jury (thank God). So how does a potentially corrupt judge get around the law? As I see it it’s in how he lies in his opinions and tries to damage his enemies, and enrich his friends. Bouchard wrote in his opinion that Shawe “did not deny” stalking Elting. Naturally, “stalking” is a criminal offense that would be picked up by the newspapers, and would hamper Shawe’s ability to get financing. This ridiculous lie was blown up by Chief Justice Strine during the appeal, who also falsely refers to it as an undisputed fact. I have talked with 100 employees and Shawe never stalked anyone, and Bouchard himself must now agree, since he eventually awarded Shawe the company. From what I’ve read, here is what I see as the EVIDENCE Bouchard relies on from the trial, and again Bouchard said publicly “Shawe did not deny” this, back in 2015 to set these wheels in motions… A HUGE NEFARIOUS FABRICATION !!!! ELTING ATTORNEY: … Now, Mr. Shawe, you’re also fond of stalking Ms. Elting, aren’t you? SHAWE: No, not in any way, shape, or form. Bouchard should go to jail for the reputation damage of this outrageous lie alone. But the whole case is a grotesque misrepresentation which I believe was engineered by Bouchard for the benefit of his friends, and in my opinion, himself. Here is what Bouchard himself wrote when Shawe requested an itemization of legal fees on November 10th, 2015: “It is customary, after a sanction is imposed, to take evidence on the itemization of the amount.” But I guess if you are the judge’s best friend, Kevin Shannon of Potter Anderson, you get $1.4 million dollars of TransPerfect money and these rules don’t apply to you. Shannon did not have to justify or itemize anything! The Coastal Network will offer a reward to anyone who can find Shannon’s itemized bills on the $1.4 million Bouchard forced Shawe/TransPerfect to pay in the record. I cannot. And don’t get me started on Bob Pincus’s $25 million share of the $250 million in pirate’s booty. UNBELIEVABLE!!!!!!! Lastly to close on the point of who is worse, Chancellor Bouchard or King Joffrey from Game of Thrones, it’s a close call. Bouchard tortured thousands of employees for 4 years — innocent hard working Americans who were forced to delay weddings, put off having children, put off sending kids to college — all because of Bouchard’s, in my opinion, illicit scheme. Further, Shawe’s lawyers during the legal battle, were forced to pussyfoot around the issue of the Chancellor’s possible improprieties. This is from an actual legal document:

Delaware is a small state with a small bar. The Plaintiff, however, resides in New York, which is a large state with a large bar, so he raises that the context of the relationship between the presiding judge in the Chancery Action and Shannon lends color to this appearance. Although the Court of Chancery’s decisions concerning the Defendants’ conduct at issue does not preclude this action or control concerning the validity of Plaintiff’s claims, Plaintiff provides a few anecdotal facts regarding the relationship of Shannon and Chancellor Bouchard. Shannon and Chancellor Bouchard, upon information and belief, have known each other since they represented aligned clients in In re Walt Disney Co. Derivative Litigation, 907 A.2d 693 (Del. Ch. 2005) approximately twenty years ago. Both served on the board of St. Francis Hospital. They have appeared as co-panelists at the annual Tulane Law School Corporate Law Institute in New Orleans, Louisiana (including while the Chancery Action was pending). Plaintiff understands (and has been assured by counsel) that these facts are not necessarily indicia of impropriety. The Court of Chancery’s failure to require Potter to submit itemized records like its co-counsel, coupled with Shannon’s relationship with the presiding judge, does however engender speculation, even if unwarranted.

This makes me sick, look at this weak presentation from the defense, even Shawe’s lawyers felt they had to walk on egg shells, when battling Bouchard’s insidious operation. The inevitable conclusion is: There is just too much power centered in the Delaware Judiciary, and this is not what our forefathers intended. Perhaps, back when the Delaware Chancellors were honorable and the Chancery Court was a nationally respected institution, this wasn’t a life or death issue for the state of Delaware. Regardless, in my view after doing more research than anyone else, I am certain that Chancellor Bouchard’s handling of the TransPerfect case, his appearances of impropriety, the innumerable irregularities, and his unusual and unprecedented decisions were not just a product of gross incompetence, but something far darker. While King Joffrey is the product of familial incest, King Chancellor Bouchard is the product of his incestuous relationships within the Delaware legal system — and even though he’s the most powerful man in our kingdom, he is not above the law and must be held accountable for his actions. Delaware’s financial future, and thus the financial future of it citizens depends on it! Delaware Lawmakers, I again call upon you for change and reform.  The responses I have received from so many of you concerning the TransPerfect Case and my recent articles about how things went down in this case are appreciated. However, the outpouring of outrage about Bouchard closing the records from the public almost brought my servers down, and broke a new record for the Coastal Network. I will reiterate a few things as I see them before proceeding: Founders, Business Partners and co-CEOs of TransPerfect Global, Philip Shawe and Elizabeth Elting, after bringing this company from a dorm room idea to a $650 million dollar a year company, Ms. Elting wanted out and did not want Mr. Shawe to have it either. After Elting was thrown out of New York Supreme Court in one hearing lasting an afternoon, she then filed her same suit here, in the Delaware Court of Chancery, seeking a forced public auction of this successful company. This litigated outcome has never happened in the history of the United States. Unfortunately for TransPerfect, Elting’s local counsel in Delaware was Kevin Shannon of Potter Anderson, longtime best buddy of Chancellor Bouchard. Shawe on the other hand did not want the company sold. Newbie Court Chancellor, Andre Bouchard (who insanely gets first right of refusal on all cases) sees his lifelong friend Kevin Shannon on the masthead of the case, and lo-and-behold, assigns it to himself, setting off years of litigation and what I view as the largest legal theft with the appearance of corruption in American History, to the tune of $250 million to lawyers and Delaware elites. Much of this money was charged, using millions upon millions of unchecked and un-itemized bills that were approved by Chancellor Bouchard, amidst widespread employee accusations of billing fraud and fabricated hours by Skadden Arps, among others. From this point on, (besides other appearances of impropriety), it is my view that Bouchard brazenly misused his personal power by ordering the documents to be sealed — documents that, by law, should be available to the public. I think the Chancellor must think he IS the law, because he just seems to make it all up— as he goes along. Here are the Top 10 comments I received from my readers. The last names and e-mail addresses have been removed to protect these good folks from any possible retaliation by the Chancery cronies. Thank you for writing in and following this case and continuing to follow it! The first comment comes from Dave Stevenson of the Caesar Rodney institute (a conservative Delaware think tank) who would like to publicly share his opinion: “Jud, I just wanted to second your concerns about Delaware losing its advantage as the place to incorporate. Combining franchise fees and abandoned property payments, this franchise is the largest revenue source for the state. I’m sure you saw Bill Freeborn’s recent article on killing the golden goose. As past Director of the Division of Corporations, he knows what he is talking about when he says a friend recently was”feeling that the recent uncertainty of the courts, the departure from established precedent, and the more “progressive” approach of Delaware’s judiciary make Delaware far less attractive for any of his global M&A clients”. I have written several pieces about the state’s frequent fee increases, and aggressive collection of abandoned property fees. We’ve been acting like pirates! Keep up the good work!”   David T. Stevenson, Policy Director Caesar Rodney Institute   Here are 10 more from the many I received: From Alice: “Wow, your latest article is really INTERESTING! Can Bouchard actually seal these public records? If it is proven that these funds were wrongfully billed, the Chancellor’s ass might be grass.. This is an angle that is a possible way to expose this possible corruption.” From Bob: “Judson, You are sure throwing some heavy stuff out there. The Democrats at Leg Hall are squirming big time. LOL Keep it up, you are making a difference !!!!” From Adam: “Jud, Isn’t there a FOIA REQUEST you could do to get those documents unsealed or some court action???” From Abner: “Judson, This is brutal. Unfortunately the boys and girls in the Delaware Legislature won’t ever remove Bouchard. However he might not get reappointed. Your articles are fun reading and the people are talking. Keep the pressure on. Best Regards.” From Lawrence: “Judson, Thank you for all the information you provide us. I believe Delaware is in horrific shape. If this f…ing Judge is half as bad as you surmise, we are in huge trouble. Love your articles.” From Erin: “Dear Judson, Great stuff. This work you are doing is really stirring the pot. Delaware has tremendous economic problems already. WHEN THE Franchise taxes disappear, God help us!” From Roy: “Hey Judson, Those documents should be open to the public. This Chancellor is a disgrace. Thanks for all you do keeping us informed.” From Kelly: “That corrupt bastard. Get him Jud. If anybody can do it you can! LOL” From Bill: “General Reid Beveridge’s recent letter to the editor regarding the demise of Republicans in Delaware and the list of three possibilities that might return Republicans to relevance in our state caught my attention. Of particular interest was his third point – the potential destruction of Delaware’s corporations franchise. It is no secret, to those who understand the corporations business, that the state’s proprietary revenue source is facing attacks from multiple fronts, including from within Delaware. I sincerely hope that the new crop of junior legislators take the time to truly understand what this business means to our state’s financial well being. “ From Eric: “Jud, Thanks for continuing to chip away at Chancellor Bouchard‘s armor! A recent Caesar Rodney institute email acknowledges that Delaware’s proprietary revenue source is facing attacks. Bouchard and his cronies are going to ruin it for us! What You are doing is important to all Delawareans. Please keep it up! ”     Folks, these comments from folks across Delaware from both sides of the political isle reflect a genuine concern about the integrity of the Chancery Court under Bouchard’s regime. Delaware’s sterling reputation as the best locale for businesses, with best equity court in the country, has plummeted. I again ask for justice on behalf of not only the thousands of TransPerfect employees that saw Custodian Bob Pincus cut their benefits and loot their company, but also justice for the citizens of Delaware! Someone must answer and be held accountable for the financial tragedy of the TransPerfect case — or our reputation will continue to sink more and more into the abyss. Lawmakers, it is time for these documents to be open for public scrutiny and an investigation of who the Chancery Court made rich with TransPerfect’s money. The law gives the public transparency on the courts. Make Bouchard follow the law and unseal the documents!  Famous law professor and trial lawyer Alan Dershowitz said of the Strine-Bouchard duo, “Any attorney who advises his client to incorporate in the State of Delaware is tantamount to legal malpractice!” Delaware has now dropped from 2nd place to 27th place nationally for being business friendly according to the “Thumbtact Small Business Survey.” Folks this is extremely detrimental for the future of Delaware’s economy. One third of all of Delaware’s revenue comes from corporate franchise fees. This comes after Delaware dropped from a significant #1 to a pathetic #11 for Judicial fairness from the National Chamber of Commerce survey. Delaware’s formerly esteemed Chancery Court has lost its great reputation which is why Delaware was the incorporation capital of the world in the first place. It is obvious that Bouchard’s actions in the TransPerfect case were part of the reason. These are two, separate, gigantic drops, folks and Delaware will definitely feel the pain.    It’s no coincidence that the large drops for Delaware have come as the TransPerfect Global case was making headlines over the past couple of years! The Chancery Court and its assigned players operating the TransPerfect Global case under the auspices of Delaware’s Chancellor has seemingly turned out to be terribly detrimental for the state of Delaware.    The TransPerfect adjudication by Chancellor Andre Bouchard was completely outrageous and unprecedented. The way it was handled should be totally unacceptable to any reasonable litigator. Millions of dollars were wrongfully forced to be spent by a Chancellor who legislated from the bench while making unprecedented and inequitable rulings. Equity is what is supposed to happen in the Delaware Court of Chancery, not the incessant and apparent feathering of nests for the benefit of the Chancellor’s good buddies and his former law partners?   Consider that in a 4-year TrasnPerfect litigation, Co-CEO Elizabeth Elting called zero fact witnesses, and had zero affidavits, which is the least evidence in a Delaware civil trial that I am aware of ever being offered by the Plaintiff? Co-CEO Philip Shawe called all 10 witnesses in the case, all testifying on his behalf. He had 43 more waiting to testify and had over 120 affidavits. Then, in front of a hundred employees per day that traveled down to Wilmington to support Shawe, Bouchard found for Elting in 2015 and ordered the company dissolved and sold. This crazy ruling shocked the TransPerfect employees beyond belief, and that’s when the wave of Delaware corruption rumors began circulating like wildfire.   In my opinion, Elting got the auction result she asked for in 2015; not because it was the right solution, indeed it was certainly without precedent, but because this allowed a vehicle, for what now appears, the moving of large sums of capital from TransPerfect’s coffers to that of a Court appointed Custodian who was a former business partner and friend of Delaware’s Chancellor. Folks, I am talking about over $25 million billed dollars that were not itemized and were approved for payment anyway by Chancellor Andre Bouchard. If there ever was the appearance of an impropriety, in my opinion this was it !   Elting’s lawyer, Kevin Shannon, is a life-long friend of Chancellor Bouchard’s. Bouchard has admitted he was friends with his appointed Custodian Robert Pincus and folks– Pincus comes from Bouchard’s old law firm. Bouchard traveled to New Orleans, and made a public appearance with Shannon, during the decision-making phase of the trial. Beyond any doubt, this is an appearance of an impropriety. Every other lawyer was made to itemize their fees, making them subject to challenge. Which lawyers didn’t have to? You guessed it.    Shawe won in the end. His winning “auction bid” was $385 million, but he’d offered $300 million publicly half-way through the litigation, 2 years ago. $250 million has been the widely reported estimated legal cost (I estimate higher), this means that roughly, the Chancery Court spent an extra $125 million of shareholder money (and took an extra two years of employees lives), only to get an $85 million dollar increase in value. This was not really “value maximizing” to the shareholders was it Chancellor Andre Bouchard? Whose value did you maximize, I wonder? Another Appearance of an Impropriety ?   There is no doubt in my mind, that Delaware has recently dropped from #1 to #11 in Judicial fairness, and a devastating drop from #2 to #27 for Delaware being friendly to small businesses, has happened in my view, because of the shady way the TransPerfect case was handled. At least when Delaware economics sinks further and further into the red, we’ll know who to point our fingers at. I guess that’s something, but it’s not enough, there should be an investigation.    Most importantly, I feel it is time for the General Assembly to act by responding to these significant drops in national recognition with necessary changes in the law — changes that will restore faith in Delaware’s judiciary so that businesses will continue to incorporate in Delaware and prosper accordingly. Please read the article below.        

Delaware slips from second to 27th in Thumbtack small business survey

By Delaware Business Now

August 16, 2018

Delaware saw its No. 2 ranking head south in the Thumbtack 2018 small business survey.Small business owners surveyed by Thumbtack, gave Delaware a B- this year, ranking 27th in a survey of business friendliness in all 50 states.Thumbtack is a website and app that finds local professionals.

That’s 25 spots lower than last year when the state ranked second and received an A+. Delaware scored higher than New Jersey (D+), but lower than Maryland (B+).

State leaders had been taking note of the positive 2017 findings from Thumbtack as surveys from CNBC and others gave Delaware low business rankings.“The biggest slip this year for Delaware was in its training and networking programs. In 2017, it received an A grade, with 27 pecent of our respondents saying that they or their business had benefited from a training or networking program,” Thumbtack economist Lucas Puente, stated in an Email message. “However, this year, only 10 percent of the small business owners we heard from had used such a program. This drop in usage led the state to get an F for its training and networking programs this year.”

Another noticeable decline came in tax regulations Puente noted Last year, 45 percent said that tax-based regulations were friendly towards small businesses; this year, only 34 percent did.

Its 2018 Small Business Friendliness Survey, ranked all 50 states and 57 cities based on factors that included licensing requirements, tax regulations, and labor and hiring regulations. With over 7,500 small business owners surveyed, it’s the largest continuous study of small business perceptions of local government policy in the U.S, according to a release.

Based on the evaluations in surveys, Thumbtack also assigned eight policy-specific grades to evaluate how easy local governments make it to start, operate, and grow a small business. For more details about the report and the full set of results for Delaware, please visit Thumbtack.com/DE.

Below is an article from LAW 360 by Jeff Montgomery that makes my blood boil and head want to explode. Having followed every detail of the TransPerfect legal saga, which in my opinion, is a prime example of the corruption and cronyism that now exists in the Delaware Court of Chancery since Chancellor Andre Bouchard assigned the TransPerfect case to himself.  It is time for the Legislature to form a special commission to investigate Chancellor Andre Bouchard, Bob Pincus of Skadden Arps, and Kevin Shannon of Potter Anderson.   The Citizens for a Pro Business Delaware took the bold step by being an effective whistleblower and exposing what is in my opinion and the option of many others, a government aided heist of over $21 million dollars that has been fleeced from TransPerfect, a healthy company by any measure, since Bouchard and Bob Pincus commandeered the firm roughly 18 months ago.   Huge amounts of money are continuously flowing into Pincus’s current and Bouchard’s former law firm, Skadden Arps, (and their “consultants”) and out of TransPerfect. Just Pincus and his firm alone are billing $300,000 to $400,000 per month. The numbers are having a devastating effect on TransPerfect. Hard-working employees, many of whom dream and counted on a mere $5,000 bonus at the end of the year are now being told to expect less, or nothing at all. I’m told raises are lower and lower, and virtually no money is being re-invested in people or infrastructure.   Now in a desperate attempt to gain revenge against the employees who went public to expose his scam, Pincus has asked his buddy Chancellor Bouchard to allow him to conduct an “investigation” of the Citizens Campaign and TransPerfect employees concerning potential leaks regarding information over LionBridge, a potential bidder and well-known competitor who might be interested in buying the company.   This action by Custodian Pincus is nothing more than a false pretense for a good old-fashioned witch-hunt to fire the people that, expressing their First Amendment Right, exposed these outrageous government-ordered bills for what they are. Of course, why these bills are not being made readily available to the public in the first place or why a Custodian in Delaware is allowed to charge the highest going rates in the country ($1,425 per hour!!), to host a board meeting once a month is a product of the incestuous corruption that is Delaware.   As always your comments are welcome.   Respectfully Submitted.   JUDSON Bennett-Coastal Network   PLEASE READ THE ARTICLE BELOW:  

TransPerfect Custodian Cleared To Probe Sale Leaks

  By Jeff Montgomery   Law360, Wilmington (August 1, 2017, 3:28 PM EDT) — Delaware’s chancellor authorized an investigation Tuesday into leaks of bidder data and other details on the court-ordered sale of translation company TransPerfect Global Inc., after warnings that the disclosures are being used in an attempt to disrupt the already hotly contested process.   Chancellor Andre G. Bouchard signed the discovery order moments after a brief telephone conference on a request filed on behalf of TransPerfect custodian Robert B. Pincus of Skadden Arps Slate Meagher & Flom LLP.   “To take no action will only embolden the violators and further jeopardize the sales process,” Jennifer C. Voss of Skadden, Pincus’ counsel, told the Chancellor Bouchard in a letter filed with the court. “TPG cannot permit any of its employees to facilitate, or cooperate in, the intimidation of potential buyers and advisors,” it said.   Voss wrote that the discovery effort would seek to identify the employee or employees who shared confidential information about a purported bidder and compensation paid to advisers to the sales process, with “appropriate action” to follow.   “The leaked information has been used by third parties who oppose TPG’s sale (and are funded by undisclosed TPG managers) to try to harm the sales process, and intimidate potential acquirers and the advisors,” Voss wrote.   Chancellor Bouchard, who has presided over TransPerfect litigation for years and ordered the company’s sale, described the issue as “a very serious, time sensitive matter” in a docket note filed in response to Voss’ request. He issued the discovery order immediately after the teleconference, saying that “I certainly understand what the issues are.”   Pincus’ discovery request came on the heels of a press release by sale opponents last week claiming that TransPerfect competitor Lionbridge Technologies Inc. was a prospective bidder in the custodian-managed process. In the statement Chris Coffey, campaign manager of Citizens for a Pro-Business Delaware, called the potential sale a “heist.”   The same organization published what it said were details on charges by contractors retained by Pincus for TransPerfect-related work, along with objections that Pincus discloses only his own billings for job. The report quoted Coffey as calling on Pincus and consultants to return payments for their work.   Coffey was one of the targets of example discovery and subpoena documents included in Tuesday’s court filings on the request to Chancellor Bouchard. Another was addressed to Coffey’s employer, New York-based Tusk Strategies Inc., where Coffey is identified as leader of its New York City practice.   Information demands in the subpoenas included details on documents and communications among Tusk, Coffey and TransPerfect employees involving consultants hired by TransPerfect and the custodian.   Also sought were communications by Tusk and Coffey involving potential bidders and bids for TransPerfect, sources of the information and details on spending made by Tusk or Coffey by or on behalf of Citizens for a Pro-Business Delaware, which has actively lobbied and campaigned against the sale.   Coffey could not immediately be reached for comment. His organization has previously objected to custodian efforts to secure details on its funding, arguing that the effort amounted to an intrusion on company worker First Amendment rights.   The case, and several related actions in Delaware state and federal court, stems from the deterioration of the relationship between TransPerfect co-founders Phil Shawe and Elizabeth Elting, and a deadlock on corporate action that came to a head in 2015. Elting owns 50 percent of the company, and Shawe owns 49 percent. Shawe’s mother owns the remaining 1 percent and voted with her son.
Chancellor Bouchard ruled in 2015 that the feud left TransPerfect hopelessly deadlocked and ordered the company’s sale under a custodian’s supervision. Shawe, in addition to legal challenges, has since offered to buy out Elting’s half of the company, while his mother, Shirley Shawe, has offered to vote with Elting and hold a shareholders meeting to appoint new directors. Both offers have been rebuffed. Delaware’s Supreme Court upheld the chancellor’s sale ruling earlier this year.   Voss wrote that the discovery request filed on Tuesday relied on a provision in the sale order allowing court assistance in addressing problems encountered by the custodian. The same order declared that TPG employees “shall cooperate fully” with the effort, at risk of sanctions.   “Buyers must be assured that TPG and the custodian can and will make every effort to stop leaks. So too, advisors must be assured that efforts to intimidate them will not be tolerated,” Voss said. “In short, TPG employees cannot have license to try to undermine the sales process.”   Attorneys for the Shawes took no position on the discovery action during the teleconference. Elting attorney Kevin R Shannon of Potter Anderson & Corroon LLP said that his client shared the custodian’s concerns.   Philip Shawe is represented by Lisa A. Schmidt, Robert L. Burns and Nicholas R. Rodriguez of Richards Layton & Finger PA, Howard J. Kaplan of Kaplan Rice LLP, David B. Goldstein of Rabinowitz Boudin Standard Krinsky & Lieberman PC, and Martin Russo of Kruzhkov Russo PLLC.   Elting is represented by Kevin R. Shannon, Berton W. Ashman Jr., Christopher N. Kelly, Jaclyn C. Levy and Mathew A. Golden of Potter Anderson & Corroon LLP and Philip S. Kaufman, Ronald S. Greenberg, Jeffrey S. Trachtman, Marjorie E. Sheldon and Jared I. Heller of Kramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel LLP.   Shirley Shawe is represented by Jeremy D. Eicher, Thomas A. Uebler and Mark M. Dalle Pazze of Cooch & Taylor PA and Alan M. Dershowitz.   Pincus is represented by Jennifer C. Voss of Skadden Arps Slate Meagher & Flom LLP.   The cases are In re: TransPerfect Global Inc., case numbers 9661, 9686 and 9700, and Shirley Shawe v. TransPerfect Global Inc., case number 2017-0306, in the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware.   Additional reporting by Matt Chiappardi, Brandon Lowery, Chelsea Naso and Vince Sullivan. Editing by Brian Baresch.
 
Judson Bennett     Please note new e-mail address, [email protected]   Please note new Twitter account, https://twitter.com/Judson_Bennett
Chancellor Bouchard’s relationship with Kevin Shannon of Potter Anderson is extensive and well-documented.  My opinion is the TransPerfect case is worthy of Judicial Corruption and whatever those Philadelphia judges did recently to get hauled off by the Feds doesn’t hold a candle to what Bouchard has done.   Here’s my view of what I’ve witnessed:   ·         Bouchard and Shannon (of Potter Anderson) share a 20-year country-club friendship dating back to when they worked the same side of the Disney Ovitz $100 million severance case.

·         When Bouchard became a judge for the first time — right before the TransPerfect case — he had to give up his prestigious board seat at the St. Francis Hospital, and he picked his friend Kevin Shannon to take his vacant seat.   ·         Bouchard, in his first big case, sees Shannon’s name on the TransPerfect case. He assigns all the cases as Chief Chancellor and assigns Shannon’s case to himself so he can control the outcome, in my opinion. Isn’t that convenient folks? And, what a nice time to start paying back your friends!?!   ·         Bouchard’s bias shows, as he ridiculously rules in Kevin Shannon’s favor in two different aspects of the case, Merits and Sanctions.  For the first time in history, he orders the forced-sale of a stock-based private company in a zero-witness case, simply on the word of Kevin Shannon. Again, not one person testified for Elting at trial — they all testified for Shawe — yet she won in a landslide!   ·         TransPerfect is an industry leader with twice the profit margins and twice the growth rate of its closest competitor. It has grown from just 2 people in 1992. It never had a year without growth and never a year without a profit. It is one of American’s greatest, business success stories. The company is not dysfunctional in any way and the testimony Bouchard cited to prove this, was totally plucked out of context.   ·         In the sanctions motions, after being railroaded by Bouchard for years, (Shawe lost 90% of all of the 50%/50% motions), Shawe motioned the Court for a criminal jury trial to fight what I’m sure he views as Bouchard’s corruption. What 25-year successful businessman requests and volunteers to subject himself to criminal conviction at the whim of a jury, on his own free will?  None. This proves to me two things. 1) Shawe is innocent and the Sanctions are trumped-up by Bouchard. 2) Bouchard badly wanted to be judge, jury and executioner for this case for a reason – and his rulings have transfered a king’s ransom to Bouchard’s former law partners and other cronies. The numbers are astonishing, my friends! You would be outraged if it were you on the other side of Bouchard’s ruling! Believe me!   ·         Bob Pincus of Skadden Arps is billing $1,425 per hour as the Custodian/Receiver in Delaware… hiding his bills in lump-sum billings. Bouchard then approves them by Court Order, and then (employees have told me) Alvarez and Marsal, run over to the Accounting Department and waive a court-order in front of the poor check-cutter named Silvia – and scream they all need their bills paid immediately! Alvarez and Marsal (Pincus’ Court Appointed Consultants) demand payment for Skadden’s outrageous bills immediately with no review – and Pincus scratches their back the same way, with immediate bill approval and no detail required. This crazy operation is a grotesque and greed filled feeding frenzy that is breaking TransPerfect.  I encourage investigative reporters to call TransPerfect, ask for Silvia in accounting, and ask her about this chicanery.     ·         In my opinion, Philip Shawe was denied a fair trial by Chancellor Bouchard. Although there are not jury trials in the Court of Chancery, they are supposed to be conducted under similar rules. Basically, I see this biased Judge as saying, “I’ll make the decision to fine you $7 million myself, even though no one testified against you, because I don’t like you.”  He did not follow the law, in either the Merits or the Sanctions, which were all in favor of Mr. Shannon. Does Bouchard think the public are idiots?

·         There’s more:  During the decision phase of the trial, when a jury would have been sequestered during a jury trial, what do Bouchard and Shannon do?  They travel to New Orleans and make a public appearance together, co-paneling before law students at Tulane University. This is insane, folks! From this move alone Bouchard should have recused himself!  What judge does public speaking appearances with one-side’s lawyer, while the case is being decided??     ·         It gets worse, and to me, this is the clearest evidence of wrong-doing in the judiciary: Bouchard orders a third of Elting’s trial fees to be paid by Shawe, and all Elting’s attorneys had to do was show their itemized bills, and had to take deductions – for things like mediation time and working on Shirley Shawe’s case – except one person, who didn’t have to produce ANY bills, and got a FULL 100% reimbursement without having to show anything. Can you guess who?  That’s right: Kevin Shannon and Potter Anderson. He didn’t have to show his bills and Potter Anderson didn’t take a single deduction. In my view, this certainly looks to be an arrogant act by Bouchard to show such biased favoritism, with an unprecedented enrichment by Chancellor Andre Bouchard for Kevin Shannon and the law firm of Potter Anderson. It is truly the appearance of an impropriety. I say this whole thing should be turned over to the Attorney General, for investigation of both Bouchard and Shannon for possible corruption. The evidence couldn’t be any clearer.   ·         Bouchard’s decision to order the dissolution of TransPerfect is 8 pages long. It basically says that “ these guys don’t get along.” Therefore, Elting loses her offensive claims against Shawe. Shawe loses his claims against her “without getting to the merits” (my view is that this means that Shawe proved his case, but the judge is not going to rule for him anyway). And therefore, he is going to arbitrarily force an auction of this 3-owner company, because of a “Director Deadlock”.  And he is going to give Kevin Shannon and Elting the maximum payout humanly possible, so the case can never settle.   ·         I have read other op-eds that blame the parties in this case for not settling. The bottom line here is, not being able to settle this case through reasonable negotiations, is indeed a circumstance obviously created by Bouchard, not the involved litigants. When a Judge intentionally uses nuclear weapons (when a fly swatter will do), and rules heavily against one party – a case can never settle under any circumstances. The deck was obviously and completely stacked by the Chancellor and in my opinion this is criminal.   ·         To give you a simple example of why this is all Bouchard’s fault (or worse, in my view, is his calculated and engineered plan)… Imagine two parties fighting over dollars, Party A says B is owed 0, Party B says he’s owed $1,000,000. Each party only has a million. The judge says, B, I rule you get $5 milllion, and A I’ll try to ruin your reputation with 106 pages of lies.  B now has a ruling worth $5 million, but all their assets together are only worth $2 million. How can the case settle? What can A give B to settle? The answer is nothing. And this is the answer that makes the case never ending, and makes Bouchard’s inner-circle of cronies, rich at the expense of TransPerfect and Philip Shawe.     I urge the Delaware Lawmakers, the Delaware Bar, the Court of the Judiciary, the Attorney General… Someone must step in and stop the TransPerfect madness! Shawe, Elting, and TransPerfect don’t deserve Bouchard’s continued fleecing of the company – and neither does any future Delaware corporation. THIS GOES BEYOND JUST THIS CASE, IT AFFECTS FUTURE INCORPORATIONS IN DELAWARE WHICH IS 1/3 OF DELAWARE’S BUDGET !

I have read the whole transcript several times and interviewed many folks, here’s what is obvious:  Did the litigants each write mean emails? Yes. Does the staff hate Elting? Yes. Is Shawe a tough, but good manager? Yes, And he’s respected and loved by the staff.  By Bouchard’s new standard of dissolution… every corporation or partnership or law firm, where people fight on email or in the Board Room, could be taken over by a rogue Judge and auctioned off without notice or due process! It Is an illegitimate “TAKING” under the 5th amendment to the United States constitution.     There is a lot at stake here. Being an eternal optimist, I’d like to believe this $100 million dollars, Bouchard has already cost TransPerfect, and the next $100 million that his planned forced auction is going to cost — is all going to be paid back by the apparent bilkers. Think about it!!!  A Delaware company, which has deadlock because of an even number of directors, comes to court for a solution, and rather than order the parties to appoint a third director and expand the Board — TransPerfect is forced to pay 1/3 of its value to legal fees, to the Judge’s inner-circle and to court-ordered consulting, accounting and investment bank fees. This is absurdity and sets a dangerous precedent that will ultimately hurt the State of Delaware which is already in huge financial trouble.     In closing, I will share more of my personal views: Bouchard’s handling of the TransPerfect case is completely insane and preposterous. Bouchard should face an investigation and potential impeachment. Kevin Shannon, Elting’s lawyer and Bouchard’s buddy, should also face investigation and possible disbarment. But all of this takes a back seat to the immediate issue of ending the environment of employee-fear that the Court appointed, Custodian (Chancellor Bouchard’s former business partner) Bob Pincus’s Nazi-like occupation and fleecing of this American success story. TransPerfect is a business being ripped apart by a Chancery Court that was supposed to be designed to protect businesses. Instead, the Chancery Court is lost at sea to the detriment of the State of Delaware, based on the current Chief Chancellor Andre Bouchard’s complete lack of a moral compass necessary to properly guide it.

As always your comments are welcome.

Respectfully Submitted,

JUDSON Bennett-Coastal Network   Judson Bennett   Please note new e-mail address, [email protected] Please note new Twitter account, https://twitter.com/Judson_Bennett

St. Francis-Gate

As you’ve been reading, I’ve been writing about what I see as obvious cronyism between Chancellor Bouchard and attorney Kevin Shannon of Potter Anderson here in the TransPerfect case in Delaware. The biased nature of Bouchard’s decisions through out the case are real and unquestionable. It’s not easy to dig up new information and I don’t exactly have the tools at my disposal that an investigative journalist a major media outlet has, but I have just learned about the most insidious tie I’ve learned of to date between Chancellor Bouchard and Shannon (the lead attorney for co-CEO Liz Elting of TransPerfect) that, of course, was never disclosed before trial. I call it “St. Francis-Gate.” Records have already shown Chancellor Bouchard, while in private practice, not only worked with Kevin Shannon on several matters over the years beyond the infamous Disney case. But perhaps most shockingly to me, Bouchard, when he was a senior officer on the Board of Directors at St. Francis Hospital, hand-picked Kevin Shannon for the prestigious Board seat vacancy that he left, when Bouchard had to give up his seat to become a judge. Let me tell you , this is breaking news, and it stinks. It is no coincidence that Kevin Shannon, who has been bestowed windfall after windfall by Bouchard from the Chancellor’s chair, was moved up to take Bouchard’s prestigious St. Francis board seat vacancy. The law is clear: Delaware’s Judicial Code of conduct requires that a judge is to disclose any potential conflicts of interest to the litigating parties including what could amount to the appearance of impropriety so that any of the parties can exercise their right to move for the judge’s recusal. This statute was designed to protect not only the litigants but the integrity of the judicial system in Delaware. Want more proof? Relationship Science is an independent site that tracks people with common business and social interests. Part of their slogan is: “We bring science to the art of business relationships.” Check out the science of Kevin Shannon.

Relationship Science

Relationship Science only connects Shannon to just 34 other people and, among his closest 34 personal connections, you guessed it, Chancellor Andre Bouchard: Let me take a small victory lap for uncovering St. Francis-Gate and the Bouchard-Shannon Board Seat, seemingly payola connection. I have been building reliable information sources in Delaware for over 50 years, and I want to thank them for providing me with vital leads to run down. I knew there was something wrong here, and the more I dig, the more it becomes painfully obvious that Bouchard’s agenda does not appear to be justice. Clearly Bouchard and Shannon have a long history of close connections together and in my learned and informed opinion, if we were in any other State but Delaware, this Chancellor never would have stayed on this case. The blatant disregard for ethics and corruption in Chancery is beyond belief, as I see it! Although now living in Palm Beach, I will always be a concerned Delaware citizen at heart. I am indeed concerned about the reputation of the Delaware Court System. This Chancellor, also as I see it, unethically did not disclose his friendship or former business connections with Shannon. He even made a public appearance with, and co-paneled together with Shannon, on a New Orleans legal boondoggle, during the decision stages of the litigation in the TransPerfect case last Spring.

Justice Leo Strine

So Leo Strine picks Bouchard to fill his Chancellor vacancy, in turn Bouchard picks Shannon to fill his St. Francis Board seat vacancy. According to various sources, Bouchard was socializing with both Shannon and Judge Leo Strine (who affirmed Bouchard and ran out Shawe’s attorney team clock at oral argument) at the Tulane legal boondoggle last year. By the way, I hear Kevin Shannon is not appearing on the Tulane panel for the first time in recent history, so this too could be tacit admission of his misdeeds last year? Bouchard never disclosed his relationship, hoping an investigative writer like me would not find it. Well I’ve been sniffing and I’m smelling smoke here. Then, predictably he proceeded to rule against Philip Shawe, although zero witnesses testified against him, in the most draconian rulings ever made in U.S. history. According to my sources, Bouchard did not allow email evidence on the company’s public server of a plot to manufacture deadlock by Elting and her attorneys, to be presented in Court. As seen below the Code of Judicial conduct is clear.

DELAWARE JUDGES’ CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT 2008 CANON

1. A judge should uphold the integrity, independence and impartiality of the judiciary. RULE 1.1 Compliance with the Law. A judge should respect and comply with the law, including this Code of Judicial Conduct. Comment: Deference to the judgments and rulings of courts depends upon public confidence in the integrity and independence of judges. The integrity and independence of judges depends in turn upon their acting without fear or favor. Although judges should be independent, they should comply with the law, as well as the provisions of this Code. Public confidence in the impartiality of the judiciary is maintained by the adherence of each judge to this responsibility. Conversely, violation of this Code diminishes public confidence in the judiciary and thereby does injury to the system of government under Rule l RULE 1.2 Promoting Confidence in the Judiciary. (A) A judge should act at all times in a manner that promotes public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary and should avoid impropriety and the appearance of impropriety in all activities. Comment: Public confidence in the judiciary is eroded by irresponsible or improper conduct by judges. A judge must avoid all impropriety and appearance of impropriety. A judge must expect to be the subject of constant public scrutiny. A judge must therefore accept restrictions that might be viewed as burdensome by the ordinary citizen, and should do so freely and willingly. The prohibition against behaving with impropriety or the appearance of impropriety applies to both the professional and personal conduct of a judge. Because it is not practicable to list all improper acts, the proscription is necessarily cast in general terms that extend to conduct by judges that is harmful, although not specifically mentioned in the Code. Actual improprieties under this standard include violations of law, court rules or other specific provisions of this Code. The test for appearance of impropriety is whether the conduct would create in reasonable minds, with knowledge of all the relevant circumstances, that a reasonable inquiry would disclose, a perception that the judge’s ability to carry out judicial responsibilities with integrity, impartiality and competence is impaired. In conducting such activities, the judge should act in a manner consistent with this Code. (B) An independent and honorable judiciary is indispensable to justice in our society. A judge should participate in establishing, maintaining and enforcing high standards of conduct, and should personally observe those standards, so that the integrity, independence and impartiality of the judiciary may be preserved.”
It’s time for the legislature to appoint a special commission to investigate this whole situation. It is clear to me that this case was poisoned for the Shawes before they even walked in the courtroom. This explains why Kramer Levin, Elitng’s primary counsel in New York chose as their Delaware counsel, Kevin Shannon since they had all served as co-counsel in the Disney case, one of the biggest cases in the history of Delaware and of course Bouchard was co-counsel as well. Delaware’s reputation was called into question this week by an article that came out on March 20 in The Wall Street Journal. The article, “Dole and Other Companies Sour on Delaware as Corporate Haven,” notes that Delaware’s business-friendly reputation is no longer justified. The last thing Delaware needs now is the Chief Chancellor being allowed to engage in unchecked judicial action which in my opinion can easily be construed as corruption. The judicial branch is the least democratic of all of our government, and a recent poll showed 70% of Delawareans disagree that the Court should have the power to force the sale of a profitable company. I again call upon the legislature to act. Stay tuned. Best regards, JUDSON Bennett Please note new e-mail address, [email protected]

A Checkered Past

For those who may not know, since October of 2015, I have fervently questioned Delaware Chancellor Andre Bouchard, who prior to his appointment to the bench was a Democratic activist, over his appointments for the position of Chief Deputy for the Register of Wills Office in Sussex County, Delaware. I challenged him for appointing three democrats (possibly political favoritism) over more accomplished personnel already within the office of the Register of Wills. Since the appointments, each of them have failed in their duties and have since been replaced, one after the other. Instead of following the recommendation of the elected Register of Wills, Cindy Green (a Republican), who highly recommended a competent, experienced, electronic-filing expert already employed within the system, Bouchard has created dissension and multiple problems resulting in delays for people needing to get their estates in order. Hopefully Bouchard’s next appointment will be better. Following this background is another situation involving a current case in Bouchard’s Court, which I find interesting:

TransPerfect

I have been made aware of a Delaware corporation operating in New York City that is in litigation in Delaware’s Chancery Court. The Honorable Chancellor Bouchard is presiding over the case. I have obtained significant documentation, letters, affidavits, and so on. The company’s name is TransPerfect Global and it is owned by Phillip Shawe and Elizabeth Elting. Elting (the Plaintiff in the case), wants to sell her half of the business, but she wants more for her stock than it is worth. She wants the controlling share. Shawe wants to buy her out and keep growing the business, but Elting will not agree, so hence, the Chancery Court has taken over. When these things happen, equity is supposed to reign, not arbitrary and capricious rulings which may end up destroying a viable American company. What would you call a situation where a Delaware Corporation named TransPerfect Global, a very successful $600 million dollar company that employs 4000 people, is being forced by the Chancery Court to be sold because one stockholder chooses to be greedy? Delaware’s Chief Chancellor, Andre Bouchard refuses to address the evidence presented to him, and force an equitable sale to the willing partner, but chose to dissolve the company. I call it inequitable, especially when the company will most likely be put up for sale and thousands of jobs will be lost. Does this sound equitable? Bouchard installed a custodian who is a friend of his, and that man, Bob Pincus, received a detailed letter from 75 senior staff members at TransPerfect asking him and the judge not to sell the company. They asserted faith in Shawe as a manager and their roles in keeping the company in great financial standing. Pincus, a former Partner of Bouchard’s at “Skadden Arps”, chose not to share the letter with Bouchard. Instead, he claimed that he got “a letter from some of the staff” airing their grievances. Instead of refuting Bouchard’s claim that the company is in disarray, Pincus failed to disclose the fact that 75 top employees expressed concern over the court forcing a sale, and demonstrated that the company is running smoothly. These employees also made an offer of $200 million to buy out Plaintiff Elizabeth Elting. Understanding the amount is less than 50% of the company’s worth, and less than the figure Shawe offered to Elting, which she turned down, the point is that the employees were willing to put their own money up because they trust Phillip Shawe to run TransPerfect. Chancellor Bouchard apparently is not considering this in his assessment. From his rulings so far, he has empowered himself by declaring the successful firm in harm’s way. Affidavits on public file in a NYS court were also handed to Bouchard showing over 175 employees’ outstanding opinions of Phillip Shawe as a manager who cares about his company. Folks, as Shakespeare once said, “Something is rotten in Denmark.” What do you call it when the temporary court appointed custodian, a man named Bob Pincus, is appointed to run the company by Chancellor Bouchard and it turns out that Pincus just happens to be a friend of Bouchard’s? I call it cronyism, scratching the back of your buddy. Pincus, according to the evidence and complaints by the current company employees, has unnecessarily spent millions of dollars in ridiculous consulting fees, all while running up the cost of the litigation. Ouch!! Particularly outrageous, is that Bouchard recently appeared on a Tulane Law School panel discussion with Plaintiff Elting’s attorney, Kevin Shannon a couple of weeks ago in New Orleans at Tulane University (* a reference is provided below). The “jury is still out” in this case and Bouchard is the sole jurist. Their joint appearance certainly has the “appearance of impropriety” and should be cause for Bouchard’s recusal from the case. Additionally, the impropriety could be justification for an appeal or even a sanction from the Delaware Bar Association? What do you call it when Chancellor Bouchard appears on a public panel in New Orleans with the plaintiff’s attorney? I call it impropriety, especially when Bouchard is about to decide the fate of the defendant in the case. Under Delaware law “the appearance of an impropriety is as bad as the impropriety itself.” Bouchard should recuse himself from this case. It appears from the evidence, pleadings, and denials I have reviewed that Chancellor Andre Bouchard continuously plays loose with not only fairness and equity, but also with propriety and ethics. From my perspective, the concern here is that Delaware depends on its corporate fees to fill its coffers. Delaware is known as the corporate state. When its equity court, the Court of Chancery, becomes compromised by poor decisions and the appearances of impropriety, then why would people continue to incorporate their businesses in Delaware? This should be of great concern to our legislators, our business people, and all of our citizens. Delaware’s economic growth is depleted enough as it is. There is much more to come on this topic and this is the primary salvo. This is an interesting scenario – and a first of its kind – whereby a viable business could be forced out of business by the judicial branch of Delaware’s government. I have sent my opinions to Chancellor Bouchard, who is supposed to rule on this case on April 27th. I am curious to see what happens, however all indications from the previous pleadings and denials which are public record indicate that the company will go on the auction block and could be eventually outsourced abroad, killing thousands of American jobs. Folks, this is not what America is supposed to be about. Indeed, I find this possible scenario most disconcerting. Your comments are welcome and subject to being forwarded. Respectfully submitted, JUDSON Bennett-Coastal Network

TransPerfect Case Exposes the Risk to Delaware Economy from Bouchard’s Unchecked Power

William Shakespeare in his play Henry VI, incorporated (no pun intended) through his character “Dick the Butcher”, the famous line “The first thing we do, is kill all the lawyers”. Even today, lawyers themselves often smile at the inference made by Shakespeare about the perceived opinion so many citizens have about the ethics, standards, and practices of the legal profession. Unfortunately, when we need a lawyer, it is an expensive proposition. I know this to be true from personal experience as do many of my readers. The bottom line is that most attorneys will take either side in a civil matter as long as the money is there. In my mind, having to hire a lawyer to protect you is a necessary evil, because even your advocates are incentivized for a long, drawn-out, and financially draining process.

The only protection we have when we find ourselves entangled in a legal situation is the hope that the Courts will rule fairly and equitably. The lawyers are supposed to operate under strict ethical guidelines established by the Bar Association. The Judiciary is supposed to be held to an even higher standard, being impartial, unbiased, fair — without the appearance of impropriety, much less impropriety itself. When that does not happen, then it becomes a form of corruption leading to a loss of confidence in the judiciary system. In Delaware, the TransPerfect case has many in our state questioning the ethics of Andre Bouchard, the Chief Chancellor himself. When this happens, our democratic process becomes tainted, constitutional rights to a fair trial are trampled, and the damage to a company, the litigants, and the operation can be irreparable.

All this being said, Chancellor Andre Bouchard seems to have gone beyond “abusing his discretion” in the TransPerfect case. In my opinion he has obliterated it from any objective consideration. He has set a frightening standard for all Delawareans, which is of significant concern to our state. I have been writing regularly about this case in an attempt to bring Bouchard’s actions out of the shadows and into the light, as he single-handedly not only endangers TransPerfect, a private profitable Delaware enterprise — but also endangers Delaware’s corporate bonanza, which is responsible for 25% to 33% of our entire state budget. What happens if the money goes away? Bouchard will remain perched on his arrogant mountain, after recently entering the judiciary via a political appointment vs real bench experience. Indeed, he will not suffer, while the average man, woman, and child in Delaware stands to be meaningfully impacted by the rogue nature of his decisions.

The question is: Should a rogue Judge, through his capricious, arbitrary legal decisions, be able to sell off a successful company that employs 4,000 people for no good reason? Or should Bouchard be held accountable for his complete disregard of the law and precedence, his audacious appearances of impropriety during the case, his unreasonable — unheard of — and wholly-unsupported sanctions, and his complete disregard and disrespect for all true evidence in the case? Should he be permitted to cherry-pick testimony out of context to “back into” his desired (and predetermined result)? Simply put, in my opinion, to not hold Bouchard accountable for his actions of possibly destroying years of the Chancery Court’s sterling reputation, and turning it into a Kangaroo Court — as it has done during the TransPerfect case, would be an injustice. This may be my subjective opinion, but it is based on objective observations from many days of intense research which I have devoted to this case. Why? Because I believe Delaware deserves to know how Bouchard operates, and how his judicial overreach can damage our state.

Why the hell would any business owner incorporate in Delaware once they’re aware of Bouchard’s rulings? Businesses want stability and predictability. In this case, one shareholder, without a controlling share, ran into Court, produced no witness, spewed self-serving nonsense — and is now getting the company dissolved and auctioned off?! Who would take this risk by incorporating here? It is just a matter of time before Bouchard’s reputation for destruction starts taking more and more food off the table of the average Delawarean.

In brief, let us look at the facts:

1) A woman gets mad (Elizabeth Elting) and sues her partner Phillip Shawe in the Delaware Chancery Court.

2) Judge orders the company to be sold which makes $500 million a year – causing 4,000 workers and their families uncertainty – and the distinct possibly of losing their jobs.

3) There is no evidence of “irreparable harm” (the false hook Bouchard used to seize the company and install his cronies), is absurd. Bouchard himself admitted that since Elting and Shawe have fought for many years, his ruling was speculative in nature! It is outrageous — and folks — this cannot be what the Delaware Legislature intended!! In the “Harm” Section-226 of the Delaware law, is an indication that to show harm is something Bouchard must have evidence of — instead, he tells the world he’s “guessing”.

4) The company has 3 stockholders — ruling is undisputed, yet Kevin Shannon of Potter Anderson somehow convinced the judge that Shawe’s mom was not a real person, and not entitled to her own independent vote. There’s nothing in the evidence record that says Shirley Shawe will only vote with her son — another key ruling based on “NO EVIDENCE” other than Shannon’s say so (Elting’s lawyer).

5) The Plaintiff (Elting) (unlike Shawe who loves the company), stands to profit more, if the company is sold in its entirety, than she would if she just sold what she owned (her stock). So her game, for which the Court has been a willing accomplice, has been to use attorneys to create infighting and the illusion of problems at TransPerfect, and ask the court to force Mr. Shawe and his mother to exit their positions involuntarily. An un-American proposition under any circumstances.

6) Defendant, Phillip Shawe, was not allowed to present key evidence, because Bouchard intentionally suppressed it. This evidence was alleged to show Elting and her attorneys participating in Crime-Frauds, yet Bouchard would not allow the evidence to be used or even look at it in private.

Shawe is being sanctioned for the investigating of his own computer servers — as the employee handbook allows him to do. He is also facing sanctions for lying when there is NO EVIDENCE whatsoever that he did so. Bouchard paid no attention to the minor and immaterial differences in Shawe’s 10 witnesses vs. Elting’s 0 witnesses. Bouchard accused Shawe of destroying records, when indeed he did not. Shawe made a mirror image to preserve all computer evidence; what’s the difference whether it is employee X (Elting) (out of 4,000) or employee Y — the material point is all evidence was preserved. Bouchard seems incapable of understanding that once something is preserved, it cannot be destroyed, spoilated, or even deleted. Bouchard drones on and on (in his opinion) speaking of how Shawe “deleted” files, when in actuality, he did not. He made a mirror image and all was preserved. Three experts verified this in the hearing.

Plaintiff’s attorney Kevin Shannon is an old friend of Chancellor Bouchard. During the deliberation phase, while Bouchard was supposed to be weighing evidence adduced at trial, he instead went to “boondoggle” in New Orleans and co-paneled together with Shannon in a PUBLIC FORUM. If a member of a jury did this in deliberations, they’d be dismissed. An obvious appearance of an impropriety? This investigative reporter is convinced that it is more than that.

Sanctions imposed on Phillip Shawe in the amount of $7.1 million dollars. High? I wonder what your family gets if you get hit by a Delaware bus? … probably a lot less. This amount is obscene and biased. Bouchard’s miscarriages of justice keep adding up. Singularly, they could possibly be justified? Together, they do not pass the laugh test.

The custodian, appointed to run the company is a member of Chancellor Bouchard’s former law firm and has already run up an $8 million dollar tab and is being sued in federal court along with Bouchard for violating the employees’ 1st and 4th amendment rights. And that $$ meter is still running!

The legal fees to date for both parties are estimated to be around $42 million dollars, plus $8 million in costs mandated by the court ordered custodian. That’s $50 million the Chancery Court has forced a DE corporation to spend on cronies and cronies of cronies. This calls out for judicial reform by the legislature and must stop.

Frankly, from what I have gleaned from this case, which I have devoted countless hours to studying, the only person who should be sanctioned is Chancellor Andre Bouchard. Let’s say you incorporate in Delaware, you fulfill the American dream of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness by creating a successful business, but then you have a judge order the company to be sold, fine one of the owners to the tune of 7.1 million dollars, fleece the company out of $ 8 million (or arguably $50 million) bucks, and ultimately risk its destruction. Wow, doesn’t make incorporating in Delaware very attractive, does it?

This is an issue that all Delawareans must be aware of, must be concerned about, and must take a stand on. I will say it again, why the hell would anybody want to incorporate in Delaware under Bouchard’s unprecedented, unpredictable and “no evidence” rulings? Make no mistake: Nevada and Rhode Island are salivating at the possibility of usurping Delaware from its main economic driver of corporate revenue, and Andre Bouchard is giving our competitor states all the ammo they need.

As always your comments are welcome and subject to being forwarded.

This is a long piece, but worth reading to understand how the rule of law is now seriously flawed by the inequities of a failed system. Even in little Delaware this growing disease now pervades our society through cronyism, favors, and improprieties I have been writing often about the TransPerfect Global case which has received national attention because of the controversial rulings made by Chief Chancellor Andre Bouchard. I have been extremely critical of the Chancellor in the way he has handled this case for many reasons, even suggesting perhaps he should be removed from the bench. I have read every public court document in detail about this case and interviewed objective lawyers and employees of the company. I know everything about this case. Here are the undisputed facts: TransPerfect is a translation company founded by Phillip Shawe and Elizabeth Elting that is incorporated in Delaware. Shawe owns 49%, Elting owns 50 %, and Shawe’s mother owns 1%. Despite any differences, Elting and Shawe moved past their failed romance, and from a dorm room, created a multinational company successful beyond imagination. Regardless of these differences, the company has been high growth, extremely successful, and extremely profitable (due primarily to Phillip Shawe’s leadership and innovation) each year, over the past 24 years. The company now has revenues of over $500 million per year, and employs 4000 people, from 90 offices world-wide. Elizabeth Elting decided she wanted to exit the company, and wants the whole company sold. Why? Because half of the whole company price — is worth considerably more than what Elting could sell her own stake for. In other words, Elting makes much more money if she can force Shawe to exit the business at the same time that she does. The problem is, Shawe doesn’t want to sell. Shawe loves his company, his stock is private property, and he doesn’t want to sell it. Even if the dramatics described in Bouchard’s romance novel decision were true (which they are not), the Court simply should not be forcing one person (two in this case, Phil and his Mom) to sell their shares involuntarily, just to enrich Elizabeth Elting within her timetable. The Court is not meant to insert itself and act as the buy/sell mechanism for Ms. Elting’s personal agenda. Further, Elting is no woman of virtue. Not one single, unpaid non-party witness took the stand for Elting. She supposedly does something at this 4000 person company, but yet no one I’ve talked to can speak to any contributions she has made. Again, Elting could not produce one single, fact witness, beyond her own self-serving story. In the past few years, Elting removed millions of dollars from the company in unauthorized cash distributions to buy lavish houses and other assets — over Shawe’s objection. Now, Chancellor Bouchard not only ordered the company to be forced to be sold and auctioned off — a result unprecedented in U.S. history, but the madness that is Bouchard doesn’t stop there. He has also now ordered sanctions of $7.1 million dollars against Shawe, the man who built the company, in favor of Elting. I can’t say for sure, but my research indicates no other sanction levied against an individual has been this high in U.S. history. Included in this ungodly sum is $1.4 million dollars awarded in legal fees to Kevin Shannon (Elting’s lawyer) who was not even made to show his bills to prove it. The law only allows for “reasonable” fees? How can the “reasonableness” of Shannon’s fees be judged if they are hidden? The bottom line is that I believe that Chancellor Bouchard, according to my legal experts has ruled incorrectly in virtually every aspect of the case, he has overreached his judicial authority, and he has abandoned his duty and his ethics. Bouchard is guilty of perpetrating extreme bias against Phillip Shawe in favor of Elizabeth Elting. All this being said, I ask the following questions to my 6000 readers: 1) If a Delaware Judge violates his judicial authority and that of the judicial canons directing judicial ethics and behavior under the law, what do you think should happen to that judge? 2) If a Delaware judge blatantly exhibits bias in a case, prevents relevant evidence from being presented, is guilty of improprieties and cronyism, and denigrates the respect that the Court should maintain by his actions, should that judge remain on the bench? Here is what I do know: The Delaware business law is clear about what constitutes the forcing of the sale of a company by the Chancery Court. First, there must be evidence of irreparable harm. TransPerfect Global makes 500 million a year and is extremely profitable. The employees love and admire Phillip Shawe (as per affidavits), feel they have a stake in the company, and they do not want it to be sold. Where is the irreparable harm Chancellor? The law does not even permit you take control of 2 shareholder company unless it is facing irreparable harm, and folks, TransPerfect has 3 stockholders. This being said, it appears that Chancellor Bouchard has erred in his creative ruling, possibly costing thousands of people their jobs, creating the risk of Delaware’s corporate franchise being denigrated, and possibly costing Delaware millions of dollars. Chancellor Andre Bouchard is a personal friend and former business associate of Kevin Shannon of the law firm Potter Anderson (Elting’s Delaware attorney). They worked together 20 years ago on the famous Disney case in the Chancery Court, and have been buddies ever since. During the decision stage of the TransPerfect trial, Bouchard and Shannon made a public appearance together in New Orleans. None of this was ever disclosed by Bouchard. This case is a textbook example of the “appearance of an impropriety” and Bouchard should have recused himself long ago. This issue unto itself presents serious problems under the law. Heard enough? The coincidences just keep mounting against the new judge. Chancellor Bouchard has appointed a Custodian (with unlimited authority) to run the company named Robert Pincus, another friend and former associate. Pincus receives an on-going amount of $1400 an hour! He has unnecessarily hired expensive consultant friends, and together they’ve run up an $8 million tab — all paid for by TransPerfect – and the expenses mount daily. Additionally, Pincus has created a “reign of terror in the company,” threatening job termination for employees who would speak against the case, been given judicial authority to seize employee private cell phones and computer e-mails—on pain of sanctions or termination—all clear violations of the First and Fourth Amendments of the Constitution. One brave employee has filed suit against Bouchard and Pincus in US Federal Court. If he wins this case, I believe Bouchard will be culpable. In his July ruling on sanctions, Bouchard stated that Shawe had broken into Elting’s office, copied e-mails, destroyed his cell phone records, and lied under oath justifying the sanctions in the amount of $7.1 million dollars. The ruling paints an extremely negative portrait of Phillip Shawe, however the real story has been hidden and prevented from being presented as evidence in court by Chancellor Bouchard. The Employee Handbook (and New York and Delaware Law) clearly gave Shawe the right to investigate any suspicion of fraud or funds being illegitimately removed from the company by any person, including Elting.   Here is the official statement from Shawe’s attorneys, which was published in several media outlets:   

“In my opinion the sanctions decision itself is indicia of an extreme court bias against Mr. Shawe. Although Mr. Shawe was given notice on particular grounds, the court permitted Elting’s team to change its theory at trial without proper notice because Elting had insufficient evidence of the issue they had sought to sanction Mr. Shawe for: alleged spoliation? The “evidence” against Mr. Shawe on spoliation was almost exclusively based on lawyers’ arguments (not evidence by definition in any court) and a cherry-picked paid “expert” witness who had never testified before in a U.S. Court. The truth of the matter is that Mr. Shawe provided more discovery than Elting produced, and her legal team could not identify a single document that allegedly had been destroyed or withheld and caused her “prejudice.” In fact, she claimed victory on the merits. Indeed, after the merits trial, Elting’s “expert” admitted that his findings used as a basis for filing the sanctions motion were untrue, because he had not investigated the issue well enough before Eltings’ team made the allegation. Faced with this deficit of evidence, Elting’s lawyers appeared at the sanctions trial with a new theory of “lying” which had never been raised before. Shawe was tried and sanctioned for allegedly “lying” without due process.


As a consequence, it is neither surprising (i) that the court did not find the deletion of relevant evidence nor (ii) that Mr. Shawe’s attorneys were not adequately prepared to defend him against the variance in trial theory. Such unfairness is not consistent with due process. Had they been given notice of the new “lying” theory (including what issues he allegedly lied about and when), it is likely that Mr. Shawe’s lawyers could have prepared and presented evidence demonstrating that the differences in recollection were nothing more than just that – with other disclosures in the record that make them immaterial.

The recent ruling on the amount of sanctions to be paid is more of the same from the Chancellor. Although the court did reduce the fees in some instances, it utterly failed to provide due process with respect to the reasonableness of many of the fees claimed. The most extreme example of this failure is the acceptance of more than $1.4 million in merits fees from the Potter firm based on the affidavit of Mr. Shannon without any actual billing descriptions to back up the claim. It begs the question: How can the reasonableness of fees be assessed if the court doesn’t even know what was done? It also lends some weight to the speculation by others that there is a reported personal and professional relationship between Mr. Shannon and the court which may be affecting this case. Regardless, accepting more than $1 million in fee claims without requiring backup is contrary to traditional notions of fairness. Mr. Shawe is considering his appellate options.

There also have been other indicia of court bias against Mr. Shawe. During the merits trial, the Court had to address Elting’s allegations of wrongdoing leveled against Mr. Shawe relating to his review of her emails on the public company server. Mr. Shawe asserted that the emails proved that Elting committed fraud and requested that Chancellor Bouchard examine the emails in camera (in private) because they proved fraud. The court was well aware that if fraud was found, it would remove the emails from any supposed claim of “privilege” (under the crime-fraud exception), but Chancellor Bouchard inexplicably refused to review them – yielding to Elting’s position with no basis in law. Chancellor Bouchard abandoned his sworn duty to equity and justice in this regard. Instead, without consideration of the content, for the purpose of the merits case he suppressed the very emails which may prove that Elting and her attorneys engaged in a scheme to provoke Mr. Shawe and create actionable discord in the company. These and other indicia of bias (such as the remarkable success rate of Elting’s team on all motions – which her attorneys bragged about (in a Law360 article) are particularly concerning, given the recent unsolicited and inappropriate negative public statement by Vice Chancellor J. Travis Laster which was directed at the free speech activities of Transperfect employees who have been appealing to the media and the public. It is the duty of judges and lawyers to avoid the appearance of impropriety and this unprecedented instance of one sitting judge commenting on the active case of another may not be consistent with that mandate – especially when it may be interpreted as an attempt to quell first amendment rights.

At this point, the case has been certified for interlocutory appeal, and I am confident that the Delaware Supreme Court will reverse both the sale order and sanctions order based on the law. With respect to the sale order, ponder this: the facts reported in the decision by Chancellor Bouchard clearly support a finding that Elting breached her fiduciary duty by refusing to consider real estate and merger/acquisition opportunities without regard to their merit, so how is it possible that a person with unclean hands (ELTING!) can come to Chancery Court and obtain relief? When similar claims were brought by Elting in New York State court, it was tossed out with the sense that the whole litigation was absurd and the parties needed to come to a solution on their own. Justice Schweitzer specifically found that it was “unclear who drew first blood.”

Mr. Shawe is resolute that the company never faced irreparable harm, regardless of any alleged acrimony between the shareholders. TransPerfect’s performance in 2015 was more successful than 2014, and it is on pace to perform even better in 2016 despite the litigation. He is confident that the company will continue to prosper and reiterates his offer of $300 million cash to Ms. Elting for her shares.”

There you have it folks. I believe that Chancellor Bouchard is suspect and deserves intense scrutiny in regard to his actions in this case. As always your comments are welcome and subject to being forwarded.  This is the latest in a series of articles on the infamous TransPerfect case. This case originally caught my attention because it involved newly-appointed Chief Chancellor Andre Bouchard. I had previously written an article about Bouchard and his apparent political cronyism in the Sussex County Registrar of Wills office and how he appointed three different clerks, who were completely incompetent. Bouchard surprisingly responded to my article in writing, which indeed was highly unusual. There was no doubt that I had struck a significant nerve. His message was filled with non-answers and circular reasoning and it was obvious he was way off-base. You have to ask yourself, has he gotten himself in the same boat in the TransPerfect case?TransPerfect Employees Fight For Their Company Now, we are close to a year-and-a-half later with the TransPerfect case still not yet certified for an appeal. We have the appointment of a custodian, who is, of course, a former law partner of Bouchard’s. Since that time, TransPerfect has been forced to incur an incredible and outrageous $8 million dollars in fees — and the number grows daily! This boggles the mind!? Let’s think about this, folks… Phillip Shawe is running a $500-million-dollar company for 24 years and has never had an unprofitable year. Now the Court comes in with no experience in this business and forces TransPerfect to spend $8 million dollars on Bouchard’s cronies to date and this case continues and the millions mount! How and why can this blatant stealing from this company continue? Additionally, the very employees who made this company a success are expressing their outrage at the Chancellor’s decision! They work in fear of being fired by this custodian. One courageous employee had the nerve to stand up to the Chancellor’s unlawful violations of the employees’ First and Fourth amendment rights — and filed a Federal Lawsuit against the Chancellor and the custodian! Apparently Judge Bouchard and his custodian went after personal e-mail accounts and potentially cell phones of TransPerfect employees, and if they refused, the workers could be terminated! Folks, I don’t know what you call this, but I call it unconstitutional, illegal, and grounds for impeachment! I have never heard of or seen a worse case of judicial overreach, cronyism, and possible corruption in any Delaware Court in my life time. In my opinion, Chancellor Bouchard has cast a dark shadow over the once pristine reputation of the Chancery Court and the great state of Delaware, as the nation’s corporate capital. The press is watching, folks! Last Sunday’s Delaware News Journal ran a front page cover story shedding light on Bouchard’s shenanigans, but this just scratches the surface. There is much more to tell, and the future of Delaware as the incorporation capital of the world, and therefore its economy, is seriously at stake. It appears that Bouchard is playing favorites with Plaintiff Elizabeth Elting’s local counsel, his 20-year friend, Kevin Shannon of Potter Anderson. You are reading it here first, folks… soon I predict many companies will be refusing to do business in Delaware because of this case! Bouchard’s insidious actions in The Chancery Court and his apparent efforts to enrich his buddies at the expense of the hardworking people of TransPerfect must stop. Bouchard’s decisions have weakened the credibility of Delaware’s Equity Court and the world is watching. It is time for the people of Delaware to call their local legislator and say no to cronyism and no to obvious improprieties. We must demand an investigation, folks, and somehow we must stop this! No one is above the law, and this includes Andre Bouchard. We must send a strong message to corporate America that Delaware is still a place to do business before it’s too late. Stay tuned……..much more to come! As always, your comments are welcome.     SOURCE:   http://hubpages.com/business/The-Appearance-of-Corruption-and-Cronyism-Continues      What is the Court of Equity in Delaware? Dear Friends, The Delaware Court of Chancery is supposed to be Delaware’s Equity Court. What is the definition of the word “Equity”? Equity is defined by Webster’s dictionary as “ the quality of being fair and impartial.” When there is a corporate dispute, involving a Delaware corporation, the Delaware Court of Chancery decides the case. The decision is supposed to be based on objective fairness involving reasonable decisions based on the evidence provided. All relevant evidence should be objectively considered. If it is not, then there is something radically wrong. So how does TransPerfect Fit in? This brings me to the TransPerfect Global case of which I have been writing aboutwhere there are obvious improprieties involving a questionable decision. Let’s put everything in a very simple perspective. The company is a translation company that nets over $500 million dollars per year. It employs about 4000 people. It has 90 offices world- wide. It is a Delaware Corporation. There are two equal owners who were once lovers. The owners Elizabeth Elting and Phil Shawe are at odds and do not get along. Now, the case: Elizabeth Elting (who vindictively) wants the company to be sold and Phil Shawe (who loves his company and cares about his employees) does not. Shawe has offered Elting 300 million dollars for her share which is more than she would get at a public action. If the company is sold, there is a good chance that many of the 4000 employees would lose their jobs. The presiding Judge is the Chief Chancellor named Andre Bouchard. Elizabeth Elting who brought the complaint before the court refuses to make a counter offer or agree to any reasonable negotiations out of what appears to be pure spite. It certainly looks as if she wants the company to go to public auction just to hurt Shawe. Chancellor Bouchard has ordered a temporary custodian (one of his buddies) to run the company during the interim. Elting’s attorney Kevin Shannon is a friend of the Chancellor and they appeared on a legal panel together in New Orleans while in the heart of this lawsuit. This custodian has threatened employees with job terminationthrough inter office directives not to discuss the case. Millions of dollars have been unnecessarily spent with this custodian at the helm (<$5 mIllion) usurping Shawe’s successful leadership which has been clearly proven by the company’s financial success over the years and by the testimony of many employees. There was no testimony on behalf of Elting. Evidence indicating some irregularities by Elting has not been allowed to be presented. Other substantial evidence on behalf of Shawe has been ignored. Granted, under normal circumstances, when two owners of a company cannot agree and there is no written agreement in place (which there isn’t), then the assets have to be sold or one partner buys out the other? However in this case, you have one partner who is willing to buy out the other for more than what her share is worth. Let me mention one more fact. Elting lied in a recent Forbes piece where she stated that in response to Shawe’s offer she told the custodian that she would offer more. It is a lie, and she is not offering to buy, nor is she willing to sell to Shawe. This is the key fact Bouchard ignores. He can force the mediation by telling the parties he will install a third board member to break any tie and then leave the case alone. The Questions Not Being Asked Therefore I ask the following questions:
  1. Why does Chancellor Bouchard not order Elting to settle or become a silent partner?
  2. Why would he order the sale of a viable company possibly costing thousands of employees their jobs?
  3. That being the case, why would someone want to incorporate in Delaware when this is the possible result?
I am a writer who has an interest in many things. I love to expose inequities when they are obvious. Having followed this case very carefully, there is no doubt in my mind that there have been suspicious irregularities in the way this case has been handled. There is certainly the appearance of improprieties. There has been no objective fairness, impartiality, or reasonable consideration which is the duty of this court. Elting’s lawyers even bragged about how this judge awarded everything to Elting and ignored Shawe, saying they felt it was not usual. There is certainly grounds for appeal to Delaware’s Supreme Court if this case is not equitably resolved. What a shame to have a successful business decimated because of a personal vendetta by one of the partners apparently supported for whatever reason by the Chief Chancellor. I hope justice prevails and TransPerfect remains intact as a shining example of the success of an American dream. These success stories are few and far between these days. Always on Delaware’s Side As always your comments are welcome and subject to being forwarded. Respectfully Submitted, JUDSON Bennett-Coastal Network    Chief Chancellor Excuses Potential Fraud and Could Force a Sale of a Viable Multi-million Dollar Company? Delaware’s rookie Chief Chancellor, Andre Bouchard, is casting a dark shadow over his 2-year run as the Chief Chancery Court Judge. This was evident in one of his most recent decisions where he ignored overwhelming evidence and a pattern of behavior that I wonder could border on the illegitimate? Instead, he chose to rule in favor of a single party (Elizabeth Elting) who happened to be represented by his buddy Kevin Shannon. This culminated in a decision that has the potential to ruin a company and destroy the jobs and careers of 4,000 hardworking employees worldwide, 2,300 of them in the United States, nearly 1,000 in the northeast, and set a chilling precedent that could destroy Delaware’s longstanding reputation as the capital of corporate America. Chancellor Andre BouchardBouchard wasted no time in leaving his mark on the court with one of his first big cases, Elting v. Shawe C.A. No. 9700-B. It makes it clear that Bouchard is going to do things his way whether or not the law and evidence agrees with him. This decision is not so surprising considering Bouchard’s history of cronyism at the Register of Wills office in Sussex County. This case couldn’t help but remind me about the piece I wrote, on April 8, 2016, when I learned that one of the attorneys was Kevin Shannon from Potter, Anderson and Corroon. Mr. Shannon and Chancellor Bouchard have an illustrious history together, both working on the infamous case “In Re The Walt Disney Company Derivative Litigation” when Bouchard was a practicing attorney. In that case, a derivative action was brought on behalf of the shareholders disputing the $100 million payout Disney gave to Michael Ovitz after he was fired. Bouchard represented Disney and Mr. Shannon represented a fellow Board member Sanford Litvack. Mr. Shannon and Chancellor Bouchard as recently as March 16, 2016 were co-panelists together in New Orleans at a Tulane University law panel. Considering Chancellor Bouchard’s history, it comes as no shock that Mr. Shannon’s client not only won the case but as far as I can see, every motion as well. He even held a hearing to sanction Mr. Shawe for, in part, reading his partner’s emails that were open and available on the company server – stating that the company privacy rules did not apply to her. Could this have been done as a means to make Shawe pay Elting’s outrageous buyout demands? For the record, as a few publications reported this week, Shawe offered her $300 million this week and if she declines or refuses to make a counter offer, this should tell any reasonable person which party wants to come to a settlement and which one is playing games? While I have fervently criticized Chancellor Bouchard in the past, it seems he has truly gone off his mandate in this instance by ignoring evidence indicating the possibility of tampering, and intent to take down a company from within? Instead he has focused on intemperate emails between the two partners to dissolve a thriving and profitable company, while ignoring suspicious irregularities whereby there were, according to Phil Shawe’s defense team, serious breaches of fiduciary duty? Employee Campaign In case you haven’t seen the case, which I’ve written about twice in recent weeks, let me sum it up for you here: Bouchard’s Delaware Court of Chancery ordered the sale of a $500 million profitable translation business because one of the partners who has a very limited role at the company claimed there was a deadlock. The fact that the company has been and continues to make record profits makes this decision all the more disturbing because this has never happened before in the history of Delaware! After reading the various papers in the court file it is very obvious in my opinion that Ms. Elting seems to be manufacturing deadlock and using the court to gain a payout she could never get if she sold her shares on the open market. So why is this a concern for the people and the great state of Delaware? Chancellor Bouchard is sending a message to corporate America that if you are having any squabbles at a board meeting then by incorporating in Delaware you risk the court selling your company out from under the rightful owners. The decision was so outrageous that former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani chimed in and has been strongly critical of the decision. Giuliani said, “it is unAmerican for the court to break up a thriving successful company just because two directors are having some disagreements.” The last thing Delaware needs with all of its other economic problems is a mass exodus by corporate America. I applaud Giuliani’s efforts because someone needs to come to Delaware with a big broom and sweep out this mess. I said it before and I’ll say it again… the bottom line is that a very well politically connected lawyer who was appointed Chief Chancellor of the State of Delaware’s Chancery Court — even though he never served a single day on the bench, is in my opinion, making arbitrary decisions that seem to have no basis in law or fact. He apparently favors a single litigant (the plaintiff) whose attorney has a long-standing relationship with the Chancellor himself. This is indeed the appearance of an impropriety and most likely will be part of an appeal by Shawe’s legal team, if they so desire. From my perspective, I believe it is no coincidence that Chancellor Bouchard either got this totally wrong, or is making sure “his” people are taken care of. Nothing could be more compelling than the dissatisfaction of more than 600 employees of TransPerfect themselves who took out two full page ads in the Delaware News Journal expressing their opinion that there was no dysfunction at TransPerfect and that the Chancellor’s decision will inevitably result in the loss of many jobs, if not the total downfall of this extremely successful business. Chancellor Bouchard should know and care that people’s livelihoods are at stake and the corporate world is watching. This is his first big case, and it will not only define his career, but risks the future of Delaware as the state of choice for corporate America.

Open Letter to Chancellor Bouchard

Open Letter to Chancellor Andrew Bouchard   600 TransPerfect employees are urging Chancellor Bouchard to maintain the company management and leadership teams | Source Prepared by Judson Bennett Contact Judson Bennett References: Website for TransPerfect Global: http://www.transperfect.com/ Link to Conference in New Orleans: http://www.law.tulane.edu/tlsLifeAfterLS/Files/CLIAgenda-Revised.pdf Respectfully Submitted, JUDSON Bennett-Coastal Network What Should Chancellor Bouchard Do?   [polldaddy poll=9549700]    

Chancellor Andre Bouchard

 

Misguided Delaware Chancery Court Chancellor Andre Bouchard | Source

  Other News Stories on TransPerfect  Article about Rudolph Giuliani and Chancellor Bouchard Dear Chancellor Bouchard—An unAmerican decision that hurts Delaware’s corporate credibility The article linked here was written by Jeffrey Mordock at Delaware Online, and is a follow up to the looming decision that had been scheduled for Wednesday, April 27th by Delaware’s Chief Chancellor Andre Bouchard – who initially had seemed to be siding with one party, rather than take an equitable stance. The Court of Chancery is Delaware’s equity court and decides what is to happen when there are disputes or legal problems involving a Delaware Corporation. From the rulings so far, the indication was that Bouchard was going to make an extreme decision where a successful company will be forced to be sold. What would you call a situation where a Delaware Corporation named TransPerfect Global, a very successful $500 million dollar company operating in New York City, that hires 4000 people, is being forced by the Chancery Court to be sold, just because one stockholder chooses to be ridiculously unreasonable? What if it is apparent that Delaware’s Chief Chancellor, Andre Bouchard refused to address the evidence presented to him? I call it inequitable, especially when the company will most likely be put up for sale and the many jobs may go overseas, thus risking putting 4,000 people out of work. Does this sound equitable? He balked at it instead. Is it right, is it fair to force a company to be sold and to put sanctions on one of the owners based on irrelevant and misleading information that has nothing to do with fairness. Is it not suspicious or at least the appearance of an impropriety when the presiding Judge who is the sole decision maker on this company’s outcome sits on an educational panel with the plaintiff’s attorney? The bottom line is that a single Judge named Andre Bouchard, Chief Chancellor of the State of Delaware’s Chancery Court is able to arbitrarily make or break a viable company. Seems un-American to this writer. Former Mayor Rudy Giuliani agrees—read the fascinating article below. Samuel Waltz, a writer for the Delaware Business Times, also wrote on this topic and explained the fact of Elizabeth Elting’s desire for a control premium, and how it seemed as if Chancellor Bouchard was considering offering it. Contact Judson Bennett References: Website for TransPerfect Global: http://www.transperfect.com/ Link to Conference in New Orleans: http://www.law.tulane.edu/tlsLifeAfterLS/Files/CLIAgenda-Revised.pdf Respectfully Submitted, JUDSON Bennett-Coastal Network Employees Rally to Save Company As the story continues, 600+ employees of TransPerfect rallied to save the company.They signed and mailed a public letter to Chancellor Bouchard begging not to permit the company the sale to an outsider, and paid for a two page ad featuring the public letter in a Delaware newspaper. On April 27, 2016, Chancellor Bouchard seemed to have yielded a little and taken heed of the various warnings. He blasted the idea of imposing an arbitrary non-compete on half owner Phillip Shawe and suggested he would not allow one. Bouchard also pushed his decision off 30 days and demanded that the parties settle it outside of his courtroom. Court Involvement Should Chancellor Bouchard Demand the two parties settle outside of court? Top of Form Bottom of Form See results without voting Elizabeth Elting’s Position One Elizabeth Elting, 50% owner of TransPerfect, seems to be holding up the equitable sale of TransPerfect. Phillip Shawe, the other owner, has offered her 50% of the value and Elting turned it down. She wanted Chancellor Bouchard to offer the control premium, impose a noncompete and force the company to an open sale – hoping to command higher than the $300M offered (higher than 50%).   Link to Rudolph Giuliani Article Jeffrey Mordock’s Article on the Hearing  
Full Page TransPerfect Employee Ad to Bouchard

Full Page TransPerfect Employee Ad to Bouchard

    SOURCE: http://hubpages.com/travel/Dear-Chancellor-BouchardAn-unAmerican-decision-that-hurts-Delawares-corporate-credibility