.floatimg-left-hort { float:left; } .floatimg-left-caption-hort { float:left; margin-bottom:10px; width:300px; margin-right:10px; clear:left;} .floatimg-left-vert { float:left; margin-top:10px; margin-right:15px; width:200px;} .floatimg-left-caption-vert { float:left; margin-right:10px; margin-bottom:10px; font-size: 12px; width:200px;} .floatimg-right-hort { float:right; margin-top:10px; margin-left:10px; margin-bottom:10px; width: 300px;} .floatimg-right-caption-hort { float:left; margin-right:10px; margin-bottom:10px; width: 300px; font-size: 12px; } .floatimg-right-vert { float:right; margin-top:10px; margin-left:10px; margin-bottom:10px; width: 200px;} .floatimg-right-caption-vert { float:left; margin-right:10px; margin-bottom:10px; width: 200px; font-size: 12px; } .floatimgright-sidebar { float:right; margin-top:10px; margin-left:10px; margin-bottom:10px; width: 200px; border-top-style: double; border-top-color: black; border-bottom-style: double; border-bottom-color: black;} .floatimgright-sidebar p { line-height: 115%; text-indent: 10px; } .floatimgright-sidebar h4 { font-variant:small-caps; } .pullquote { float:right; margin-top:10px; margin-left:10px; margin-bottom:10px; width: 150px; background: url(http://www.dmbusinessdaily.com/DAILY/editorial/extras/closequote.gif) no-repeat bottom right !important ; line-height: 150%; font-size: 125%; border-top: 1px solid; border-bottom: 1px solid;} .floatvidleft { float:left; margin-bottom:10px; width:325px; margin-right:10px; clear:left;} .floatvidright { float:right; margin-bottom:10px; width:325px; margin-right:10px; clear:left;}
Casey’s General Stores Inc. is being shielded from a Canadian company’s hostile takeover by a state law that is unconstitutional, according to claims made in court documents.

Alimentation Couche-Tard Inc., a Quebec company that has grown in the United States and Canada by acquiring convenience stores, responded to a Casey’s lawsuit accusing the company of engaging in a classic “pump and dump” scheme by claiming that a state law designed to protect Iowa companies from hostile takeovers is unconstitutional and is superseded by a federal law regulating tender offers.

The legal battle is taking place in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Iowa in Des Moines. It was triggered when Casey’s filed a lawsuit June 11 claiming that Couche-Tard was secretly buying Casey’s stock while also offering to purchase the company for $36 a share, or roughly $1.9 billion.

Casey’s board of directors has rejected the offer twice, and on June 2 Couche-Tard made a tender offer to shareholders. It also has said it will attempt a proxy campaign to replace Casey’s board of directors with individuals who support the takeover.

Couche-Tard argues in court documents that state laws allowing the board of directors of public companies to take several steps to block hostile takeovers violate an amendment to the Securities and Exchange Act of 1943 and also the commerce clause of the U.S. Constitution.

Casey’s board announced earlier this month that it had created a scheme in which shareholders could purchase the company’s stock at a fraction of its market price if an individual or entity acquired 15 percent of the company’s shares. The “acquiring” entity would be prohibited from buying the reduced-price stock.

In addition, Casey’s extended the employment contracts and sweetened the severance packages of its senior officers, both of which would kick in as the result of a takeover.

On April 9, the day Couche-Tard issued a news release saying it was attempting to buy Ankeny-based Casey’s, the Canadian company sold nearly 2 million shares of Casey’s stock and turned a $14 million profit. Couche-Tard began purchasing the stock in 2009 at prices that ranged between $29 and $33 and eventually acquired a 3.9 percent stake in the company.

Couche-Tard sold the stock at slightly more than $38 a share, a price boosted by the company’s announcement that it planned to buy Casey’s.

The subject of a merger came up during a telephone conversation Oct. 6, 2009, between Casey’s President and CEO Robert Myers and Couche-Tard CEO Alain Bouchard, according to a court document filed last week by Casey’s. The conversation was supposed to be about credit card interchange fees.

Instead, Bouchard asked about an alliance and was told that Casey’s was not interested. In another telephone conversation on Nov. 16, Myers again told Bouchard that his company was not interested in a merger, but that Couche-Tard should present a proposal that Myers could present to Casey’s board of directors.

Though Casey’s maintains that Couche-Tard’s offer was unsolicited, Couche-Tard has shaped Myers’ request to make future offers in writing as a solicitation.

In the month preceding the Oct. 6, 2009, phone call, Couche-Tard had acquired 140,000 shares of Casey’s stock.

On April 7 and 8, Couche-Tard acquired more than 52,000 shares, pushing its total to 1,975,362 shares. Before markets opened on April 9, Couche-Tard announced its intention to buy Casey’s for $36 a share. An hour after markets opened that day, Couche-Tard sold all but 362 of the shares it had acquired over the previous eight months for $38.43 a share, according to a June filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). Casey’s stock closed at $31.59 a share on April 8.

Casey’s maintains in court documents that it did not know that Couche-Tard was buying its stock until after the Canadian company filed the statement with the SEC.

Couche-Tard dumped the stock in order to stymie what would have been an expected increase in the price of Casey’s stock following the takeover announcement, Casey’s alleges. As a result, Couche-Tard’s offer of $36 a share would appear more attractive to shareholders.

Casey’s stock closed at $35.94 on June 23.