Virginia Bankshares, Inc. v. Sandberg
United States Supreme Court
501 U.S. 1083, 111 S. Ct. 2749, 115 L. Ed. 2d 929 (1991)
- Written by Rocco Sainato, JD
Facts
The board of Virginia Bankshares, Inc. (VBI) (defendant) proposed a freezeout merger with its subsidiary First American Bank of Virginia (First American). VBI owned 85 percent of First American’s stock, and minority shareholders held the remaining 15 percent. By law, VBI did not need minority votes to complete the merger. Still, VBI’s board sent a proxy solicitation to minority shareholders soliciting their votes. The solicitation represented that minority shares would be cashed out at $42 per share, this price provided a “premium” of 26 percent above book value, and the directors believed the price was a “high value.” The merger was approved. Minority shareholder Doris Sandberg (plaintiff) sued VBI, alleging the proxy solicitation contained materially misleading statements that violated § 14(a) of the Securities Exchange Act. Sandberg presented evidence that, at issuance, the $42 price was below the shares’ properly calculated book value, the shares’ true value was $60, and VBI’s directors knew both facts. VBI argued the alleged misrepresentations were opinions, not facts, and that any misleading statement caused no damages because the merger would have occurred regardless of minority votes. A jury found for Sandberg and awarded her the $18 price difference. The court of appeals affirmed. The United States Supreme Court granted certiorari.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Souter, J.)
Concurrence (Scalia, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 899,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 47,000 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.


