Emmis decision to pay CEO legal fees illegal, financier says

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Emmis Communications Corp.’s decision to pay some of CEO Jeff Smulyan’s legal fees in a lawsuit arising from his failed bid to take the company private is illegal, charges the financier who backed out of the deal.

New York-based Alden Global Capital informed Emmis directors Thursday by letter that the company’s $200,000 loan toward Smulyan’s breach-of-contract suit against Alden violates the Sarbanes-Oxley Act.

Alden is demanding, on behalf of Emmis and its shareholders, that directors immediately revoke the loan and recover any proceeds that may have been distributed.

If the loan is not rescinded by close of business on Feb. 11, Alden said, it will pursue legal action.

Emmis’ board unanimously approved the expenditure Dec. 24, according to a filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission. If the litigation is successful, the company will be repaid $300,000 from any financial recovery.

Emmis filed the breach-of-contract lawsuit in September against three Alden Global Capital units that backed out of the going-private deal.

JS Acquisition LLC, the company Smulyan formed to take Emmis private, says the transaction failed when Alden changed course after months of negotiations with a group of preferred shareholders, costing the company $10.2 million in fees and other expenses.

Alden and JS Acquisition agreed in April to help take Emmis private. But, in July, nine dissident investors—holding a combined 38 percent of the company’s preferred shares—emerged to block the $90 million deal.

Alden ultimately pulled out of the transaction, citing a “precipitous” drop in radio-industry assets.

Emmis shares opened Monday morning at $1.06 each, down from a 52-week high of $2.45 reached when the deal to take the company private was announced in April.

Shares late last month rebounded above a $1 threshold the company needs to maintain to avoid delisting on the NASDAQ exchange. Emmis shares have closed above $1 for six consecutive business days and need to stay above the amount for 10 days before May 2 to avoid delisting.

Alden touched upon Emmis’ shaky financial status in its letter to directors.

“Given the apparent dire financial situation Emmis faces, the Board’s decision to loan [Smulyan] a portion of the Company’s remaining cash, which at the very best will not be recovered until the end of protracted litigation, has subjected the Company to imminent injury beyond just the loss of the illegally loaned funds,” a lawyer for Alden wrote.

A spokeswoman for Emmis, however, maintains the loan was “well-vetted” by directors and company lawyers.

“We're confident with the Board's position on the issue, and have equal confidence in the outcome,” spokeswoman Kate Snedeker said via e-mail.

Alden insists the loan violates a section of Sarbanes-Oxley that it says prevents executives of public corporations from exploiting their relationships with directors to make a company a lender of last resort.

Further, the loan violates disclosure laws, Alden argued, because Emmis failed to list it as “compensation” to Smulyan.

“We searched Emmis’ public disclosures in vain for rationale justifying handing Mr. Smulyan a hidden bonus for use in pursuing dubious claims against one of Emmis’ most significant shareholders,” Alden’s letter said.

The breach-of-contract suit JS Acquisition brought against Alden is pending in federal court in Indianapolis.

Founded by Smulyan in 1981, Emmis owns more than 20 radio stations in the United States and publishes regional magazines in numerous cities, including Indianapolis Monthly.


  • Can't agree with you
    I'm not sure I can agree with you. The article states the money was a 'loan' from the company, which makes it seem like it was have to be repaid. Not sure how Alden could say this was a bonus given that it was a loan.
  • Abuse of power
    Alden is correct in their position. Jeff Smulyan can well afford the attorneys. He is exerting his influence on the board he appointed.

Post a comment to this story

We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. I took Bruce's comments to highlight a glaring issue when it comes to a state's image, and therefore its overall branding. An example is Michigan vs. Indiana. Michigan has done an excellent job of following through on its branding strategy around "Pure Michigan", even down to the detail of the rest stops. Since a state's branding is often targeted to visitors, it makes sense that rest stops, being that point of first impression, should be significant. It is clear that Indiana doesn't care as much about the impression it gives visitors even though our branding as the Crossroads of America does place importance on travel. Bruce's point is quite logical and accurate.

  2. I appreciated the article. I guess I have become so accustomed to making my "pit stops" at places where I can ALSO get gasoline and something hot to eat, that I hardly even notice public rest stops anymore. That said, I do concur with the rationale that our rest stops (if we are to have them at all) can and should be both fiscally-responsible AND designed to make a positive impression about our state.

  3. I don't know about the rest of you but I only stop at these places for one reason, and it's not to picnic. I move trucks for dealers and have been to rest areas in most all 48 lower states. Some of ours need upgrading no doubt. Many states rest areas are much worse than ours. In the rest area on I-70 just past Richmond truckers have to hike about a quarter of a mile. When I stop I;m generally in a bit of a hurry. Convenience,not beauty, is a primary concern.

  4. Community Hospital is the only system to not have layoffs? That is not true. Because I was one of the people who was laid off from East. And all of the LPN's have been laid off. Just because their layoffs were not announced or done all together does not mean people did not lose their jobs. They cherry-picked people from departments one by one. But you add them all up and it's several hundred. And East has had a dramatic drop I in patient beds from 800 to around 125. I know because I worked there for 30 years.

  5. I have obtained my 6 gallon badge for my donation of A Positive blood. I'm sorry to hear that my donation was nothing but a profit center for the Indiana Blood Center.