IBJNews

Sale of family-owned business leads to lawsuit

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrint

A family dispute over the sale of a business has led a former shareholder to sue her brother and mother, claiming they earned multimillion-dollar profits at her expense by selling the company without her knowledge.

Deborah A. Ecksten of Fortville filed suit in Hamilton Superior Court on Monday following the December 2010 sale of Indianapolis-based Createc Corp. to DeKalb, Ill.-based Tegrant Corp.

Ecksten says in her complaint that brother Alan R. Lewis and mother Linda A. Lewis committed fraud and violated state securities laws by declining to inform her about the $61 million sale until after her stock-option rights expired.

As a result, Ecksten’s share from the sale of $1.5 million was far less than the $15 million made by her mother and $12 million made by her brother, respectively.

“Alan hid from Debbie what he and Linda would receive from the sale of Createc so Debbie would not discover she was deprived of the opportunity to be treated equally with Alan in the sale,” Ecksten’s suit said.

Richard Lewis, the father of Alan and Debbie and former husband of Linda, founded Createc in 1975. The company produced polystyrene and polypropylene foams used to make protective packaging, containers and automotive parts.

As part of a divorce settlement in 2000, the family agreed to a stock-option agreement in which Richard and Linda each received 162.5 shares and Alan and Ecksten 15 shares apiece.

The aim of the agreement was to maintain family control and to give Alan and Ecksten an opportunity to assume greater ownership and control of the company, the suit said.

An amended version they signed in 2007 created a 20-for-1 stock split in which Alan agreed to purchase all of his father’s 2,755 shares for $6 million over a five-year period.

But Ecksten alleges that her brother didn’t have the money to buy the shares and drew on a company line of credit to pay his father.

In 2010, as president and CEO of the company, Alan entered into discussions to sell Createc to its largest competitor, Tegrant, according to the complaint, without informing Ecksten. She claims in her suit that she didn’t learn of the sale until the day before the scheduled closing—Dec. 30, 2010.

Under the stock agreement, Ecksten said she had the right to purchase her mother’s stock for $2,000 a share, similar to how Alan had purchased their father’s stock.

Had she known of the pending sale to Tegrant, Ecksten said she would have purchased her mother’s shares, which ultimately fetched $8,628 each under the terms of the sale.

“Defendants hid from Debbie the deal that had been struck to sell Createc to Tegrant for the sum of $61 million until Dec. 29, 2010, to make sure that Debbie did not exercise her right to purchase all of Linda’s shares for the sum of $2,000 per share,” the suit said.

Ecksten is seeking a judgment against each defendant in an amount “sufficient to fully compensate” her.

Sam Laurin, attorney for Alan and Linda, said his clients believe the suit is without merit. A mediation session is scheduled for Feb. 13.

“We’re disappointed that there was a need to go public with this issue prior to the time that we hope we can resolve it,” Laurin said Monday afternoon.

Also named in the suit are former Createc executives Michael Votaw and Michael Bacon, who owned a minority share in the company.

Createc had three manufacturing plants in the United States and one in Mexico when it was acquired by Tegrant. Tegrant was acquired by Sunoco for $550 million in late 2011.

 

ADVERTISEMENT

  • crook
    I find it very easy for someone to call them a crook when you don't know the details. That's not a very nice thing to say!
  • Pointless Judgement
    I have known this family for 15 years. Alan and Linda Lewis are probably some of the most giving, compassionate and integrity-filled people I've ever met. Their business prowess was honed over decades of hard work. Comparing them to the Dunhams of our city is specious and absurd, especially when you know NOTHING about the situation. Furthermore, Mr. Olson's article is one-sided at best. But what would we expect for "journalists". For the most part, they are people pretending to report facts, then change them drastically as they learn more, to save face, with little or no consequence. I have a feeling those who have instigated this lawsuit are going to face an ending that will not go in their favor. To the detractors in this comment section, remember this post. I'm sure you'll be back to apologize for your half-cocked theories. (insert rolling of eyes)
  • The truth
    As a person and businessman who has known this family since the early days of Createc, I find this representation of the events around the sale of Createc appalling. Please do us the courtesy of finishing this story after ALL the facts are made clear, if you put this in the context of history, remember back to the days when the auto industry was crashing, government bailouts and massive capital infusions to keep the industry and all the supply base viable...you will find a bit of genius in Alan Lewis's ability to position his families well being ahead of any personal greed motive. I believe if one studies this case closely the question of greed will be answered quite clearly.
  • Withhold Judgment
    As someone that has known the Lewis family for more than 30 years, I have a hard time believing the vitriolic accusations stated in this article. I am also saddened to see a private family matter made public. Let’s withhold judgment until the true facts are known.
  • Nice Family
    How do you cheat your sister and father? Ex's stick it to each other all the time. Wonder how Alan Lewis can live with himself. You should be embarassed and ashamed.
  • Don't get it
    What's with people in this town - Durham, Brizzi, Bales, now this guy? Another crook!

    Post a comment to this story

    COMMENTS POLICY
    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
    ADVERTISEMENT

    facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

    Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
    Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
     
    Subscribe to IBJ
    1. So the Mayor adds another non value added layer to having a vehicle towed? Whereby the City Government RECIEVES AN ILLEGAL KICKBACK FROM A LGOISTICS COMPANY THAT SUBS THE WORK TO LOCAL TOW COMPANIES? What is the service the City performs for receiving the "tribute"? This is RICO!!!!! What a corrupt and unnecessary layer. What a dirtbag Mayor and his cronies.

    2. Owner occupied housing. Clear enough?

    3. So people think I am paranoid. It's from experience in dealing with puds requested by developers who make major donations themselves to representatives, have nice fund raisers for those running for office and hide through pac's. then there are the public relation firms. You will note some pr comments below. You there Clyde Lee? My opinion. Commercial along 421, great. Multifamily housing, terrible idea that will change the town. Senior condos or zero lot line homes west, great. I suggest keeping all entries to commercial areas at 421. All entries to owner occupied on sycamore. Will keep the traffic on sycamore down some. Two other things. You can't trust what will be there in 10 years. Steve builds quality stuff, but areas change over time. Look at the changes at the wall mart center at 86th and 421 over the last 10 years. Look at the apartments and neighborhoods behind St Vincent's. Raintree properties WILL decrease in value if commercial and multifamily goes in near. It has already been happening around the bridges area. The houses that have been sold recently are way below market. Several deals not closed due to the Illinois construction and the whole unsurety of the bridges. It's pretty simple, Zionsville will approve the whole thing because the city council has been groomed over a LONG period of time for this. I might even suggest some are in their position as a result of this.

    4. Esta, do you have a dog in this fight? You seem to really want to knock anyone against this project. No, I didn't move to Indiana for the architecture. I moved here for that red barn in the field. The horses and fields of corn. A place that is NOT overdeveloped. There are plenty of nearby places in Indianapolis that could be REDEVELOPED instead.

    5. RKW - OK, we get it, you're paranoid. The question is, are you paranoid enough? Greg - Yes, Pittman(s) is (are) at it again. They are developers, they build things. It's what they do. So when you go to work tomorrow, Greg, you're at it again too. Cliff - Really? You moved to Indiana for its progressive architecture? That's like moving to England for the cuisine. Zionsvillain - The house you moved to was once a field or woods. I'm willing to bet folks were upset when that ground was plowed under and a house was built. But I guess now that you are in, everything should stop? "My house was OK, but the next one is sprawl." SE Guy - Please don't paint us with such a wide brush. Most reasonable Zionsville residents welcome planned, measured development.

    ADVERTISEMENT