Printed from

Apple shareholder suit accuses Cook, Jobs, others of misconduct

updated 10:04 am EDT, Fri August 15, 2014

Directors, executives accused of bringing company into legal trouble

A new lawsuit, filed on behalf of plaintiff R. Andre Klein, is seeking damage compensation for Apple shareholders as a result of alleged misconduct by the company's directors and executives. Lawyers for Klein accuse former CEO Steve Jobs, current CEO Tim Cook and others of "breach of fiduciary duty, gross mismanagement, corporate waste, and breach of the duty of honest services." Specifically, by engaging in anti-poaching practices, Apple leaders are said to have caused the company to break antitrust laws, issue misleading proxy statements, and suppress workers' wages.

It's also said to have wasted significant amounts of money due to "years of lost opportunities to hire more qualified employees that were employed at other companies; costs incurred from defending and paying a settlement in the class action for violation of antitrust laws; costs incurred from defending and settling allegations by the Department of Justice; and loss of reputation."

The complaint is founded largely on a separate and as-yet-unsettled class action lawsuit against Apple, Adobe, Google, and Intel over anti-poaching agreements. The companies are believed to be at the center of a conspiracy in which they and other technology firms agreed not to hire from each other. This may have allowed the involved parties to avoid competing in salaries and benefits to lure and retain talent.

Klein's attorneys point to a particularly damning series of discoveries in that case which put Jobs at the center of the conspiracy. A series of emails shows that in 2005, Jobs made "irate" phone calls to Google co-founder Sergey Brin, complaining about Google trying to recruit members of Apple's Safari team. By February 26th the two companies had forged a pact not to hire from each other; from there anti-poaching agreements extended to many other businesses, including Comcast, Microsoft, Oracle, and IBM. A surfaced affidavit suggests that Jobs may have even threatened Palm with a patent suit if it hired an Apple worker; former Palm CEO Edward Colligan is said to have described Jobs' anti-poaching rules as "likely illegal."

Aside from Jobs and Cook, other defendants named in the suit include former board chairman William Campbell, former CFO Fred Anderson, and board members Mickey Drexler, Art Levinson, Robert Iger, and Andrea Jung. Another 30 anonymous defendants are cited, but their identities will only be investigated if the case moves into discovery.

By Electronista Staff


  1. pairof9s

    Senior User

    Joined: 01-03-08

    And good luck in showing how that severely harmed your investment...I mean knowing this information even now, are you NOT going to buy Apple stock?

  1. aviamquepasa

    Fresh-Faced Recruit

    Joined: 10-22-11

    Considering that since 2005, Apple's stock has multiplied by 10, I don't see the point.

  1. sunman42

    Fresh-Faced Recruit

    Joined: 11-09-11

    I don't even play a lawyer on TV, but in order for a suit to proceed, the complainant has to be able to prove standing; that is, some way in which they, personally, were harmed (usually financially) by the actions of the defendants. How can anyone prove they were harmed by these actions? The burden of proof is on the complainant in such cases. I'm willing to bet this is dismissed before it gets to trial.

  1. James Katt

    Junior Member

    Joined: 03-02-08

    Apple has become the world's largest and most profitable non-oil company.
    By no measure was any harm done to stock holders - like me - who look at lawsuits like this as truly harmful to Apple since Apple is forced to waste time and resources defending itself against these parasite lawyers. It is up to judges to give these lawyers the death penalty. Sanctions are simply not enough.

  1. Charles Martin

    MacNN Editor

    Joined: 08-04-01

    Call me old-fashioned, but wouldn't you at least have to prove the accusations of the criminal case so that you have any evidence of the primary charge first? This shareholder reminds me of the Department of Justice: sue first ask questions ... well ... never.

  1. ryanjo

    Fresh-Faced Recruit

    Joined: 10-22-01

    Nuisance lawsuit. Apple will pay something to make it go away. Less expensive than defending it, even if you win. Just another way for trolls to make money in our corrupt legal system.

  1. ctt61

    Fresh-Faced Recruit

    Joined: 06-21-05

    They should change the law, so that if plaintiff lose the case, his or her law firm have to pay all the cost of both sides. this is the only way that these type of lawsuits will stop. only the legitimate case can proceed.

Login Here

Not a member of the MacNN forums? Register now for free.


Network Headlines


Most Popular


Recent Reviews

Seagate Wireless

It seems like no matter how much internal storage is included today's mobile devices, we, as users, will always find a way to fill the ...

Lenovo Yoga Tablet 2 (Android, 10.1-inch)

Lenovo is building a bigger name for itself year after year, including its devices expanding beyond desktop computers. The company's l ...

Brother HL-L8250CDN Color Laser Printer

When it comes to selecting a printer, the process is not exactly something most people put a lot of thought into. Printers are often t ...



Most Commented


Popular News