In the News

Haynes and Boone Obtains Denial of Class Certification for NFL in Super Bowl Ticket Case

Lawyers from Haynes and Boone, LLP have scored a major victory on behalf of the National Football League, successfully defeating a motion seeking to certify a class action in a lawsuit by Super Bowl XLV ticketholders concerning alleged issues with temporary seating. The firm had earlier obtained dismissal of most of the claims in the case.

The lawsuit had sought in excess of $5 million in damages on behalf of four proposed classes: ticketholders who were denied seats, ticketholders who were delayed in gaining pre-game access to their seats, ticketholders who were relocated to lesser quality seats, and ticketholders who allegedly had obstructed views. The NFL made voluntary reimbursement offers to all ticketholders in the first three groups shortly after the game, and the vast majority accepted. >>



Recent Publications

Securities Litigation Year in Review 2013

The Haynes and Boone Securities Litigation Year in Review 2013 outlines recent (and upcoming) Supreme Court decisions as well as notable rulings from federal courts of appeal and district courts in the past year that affect private securities litigation, including the areas of class certification, loss causation, scienter, duty to disclose, pleading falsity, preemption, standing and statutes of limitations. The Review also discusses government enforcement cases and trends, and key state law rulings in shareholder derivative and fiduciary litigation. >>

Supreme Court to Again Address Class Certification in Securities Fraud Suits

On Monday, June 11, 2012, the Supreme Court granted a writ of certiorari in Connecticut Retirement Plans and Trust Funds v. Amgen Inc., 660 F.3d 1170 (9th Cir. 2011) to clarify the standards for certifying a class in a securities fraud suit under the fraud-on-the-market theory. >>



John Tancabel

Associate

Dallas


2323 Victory Avenue
Suite 700
Dallas, Texas 75219
T +1 214.651.5597
F +1 214.200.0729

Areas of Practice

Education

  • J.D., Southern Methodist University Dedman School of Law, 2007, summa cum laude; Salutatorian; Associate Managing Editor, SMU Law Review; Order of the Coif
  • B.A., University of Dallas, 2002, summa cum laude; Phi Beta Kappa; Willmoore Kendall Award

Bar Admissions

  • Texas

Court Admissions

  • U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas
  • U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

Judicial Clerkships

The Honorable Sidney A. Fitzwater, Chief Judge, U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas (2007-2008)
John Tancabel

John Tancabel joined Haynes and Boone after clerking with the chief judge of the Northern District of Texas, the Honorable Sidney A. Fitzwater. His practice centers on securities and fiduciary duty litigation and white collar criminal defense.

John's recent securities and fiduciary duty litigation experience includes:

  • Participated in historic, one-week trial in Delaware Chancery Court on the validity of a 4.99% shareholder rights plan (or net operating loss "poison pill"); represented company-investor challenging the poison pill as the result of board of directors' breach of fiduciary duty

  • Defense of various entities against investor class action lawsuit alleging breach of fiduciary duty and vicarious liability in connection with failure of major hedge fund

  • Defense of trustees of two trusts against civil RICO claims, mismanagement claims related to trustees' sale of large, trust-owned corporation, and other breach of fiduciary duty claims

  • Defense of board of directors of acquired publicly traded oil and gas company against five shareholder class action lawsuits alleging breach of fiduciary duty in connection with the board's approval of merger with a private equity firm

  • Represented real estate investment company in lawsuit against company manager for breach of fiduciary duty based on manager's acceptance of kickback payments; summary judgment granted against manager and judgment entered

  • Defense of public company against shareholder derivative lawsuit in connection with alleged antitrust violations of the company's directors

  • Advised two different investment fund clients on exposure to claw-back lawsuits from feeder funds of Bernard Madoff's investment fund

John's recent white collar criminal defense experience includes:

  • Defense of lawyer indicted for mail and wire fraud in connection with an alleged multi-million dollar kickback scheme in negotiating tort settlements; five-week trial in federal court resulting in hung jury/mistrial

  • Court-appointed defense of individual indicted for felon-in-possession of a firearm; handled all aspects of defense including argument at hearings and examination of witnesses at sentencing

John has also worked on other complex litigation, including:

  • Defense of red-light camera company against class action lawsuit in federal court; motion to dismiss granted as to all claims

Publications

  • "Director and Officer Fiduciary Duties in the Context of Insolvency," co-author with Thad Behrens, presented to the State Bar of Texas 8th Annual Advanced In-House Counsel Course, Chapter 11, July 30-31, 2009.
  • "Reflections on the McNulty Memorandum," 35 SEC. REG. L.J. 219 (2007).

Selected Representative Experience


Class Action Against Major Refinery (S. Dist. Tex. 2013)
Defeated class certification in lawsuit alleging that owners' property values were diminished by alleged emissions from a refinery and seeking $10 billion in damages.

Defense of the National Football League in Consumer Class Action
Defeated class certification for the National Football League in lawsuit alleging claims of breach of contract and fraud against the NFL and the Dallas Cowboys for allegedly not providing prescribed seats to ticketholders at the Super Bowl XLV game.

United States of America v. Hoeffner, No. 4:07-cr-00263 (S.D.-Houston Div. 2010)
Following a 15-count indictment charging him with conspiracy, mail fraud, wire fraud and money laundering, we represented a prominent lawyer, who had recovered millions of dollars for his clients in toxic tort lawsuits. The indictment alleged payment of bribes and kickbacks to two employees of an insurance company in connection with the settlements of these lawsuits. After a 6-week trial, the judge declared a mistrial when the jury was unable to reach a unanimous verdict. The case involved thousands of documents, more than 30 witnesses, and numerous complex motions.

In re Arena Resources, Inc. Shareholder Litigation
Represented acquired entity, Arena Resources, Inc., and its board of directors in nine shareholder class actions filed in two Nevada state courts, two Oklahoma state courts, and Oklahoma federal court, alleging breaches of fiduciary duty in connection with the board’s approval of the $1.6 billion acquisition of the company by SandRidge Energy, Inc.

Bell v. American Traffic Solutions, Inc., No. 09-10722, 2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 6001 (5th Cir. Mar. 23, 2010)
Defended red-light camera company in federal class action challenging failure to obtain Texas private investigator license, alleging negligence per se, and seeking monetary and injunctive relief. Obtained dismissal of the putative class action claim brought against the installer and operator of red light cameras based on the plaintiffs' lack of standing. Haynes and Boone's appellate team later persuaded the Fifth Circuit to affirm the dismissal.

In re Parallel Petroleum Corporation Shareholder Litigation
Represent acquired entity, Parallel Petroleum Corporation, and its board of directors in five shareholder class actions filed in Delaware Chancery Court, District Court of Midland County, Texas, and District Court of Harris County, Texas, alleging breaches of fiduciary duty in connection with the board’s approval of an acquisition of the company by Apollo Global Management, LLC.

In re Parkcentral Global Litigation
Represent entities in a class action alleging breach of fiduciary duty and vicarious liability in connection with the failure of the Parkcentral Global hedge fund.

Dean Foods Company Derivative Litigation
Represent Dean Foods Company in shareholder derivative litigation in which current and former directors are alleged to have breached their fiduciary duties to the company by participating in, or failing to prevent, violations of U.S. antitrust laws.

Trilogy, Inc., Versata Enterprises, Inc. (Selectica v. Versata)
Represented a provider of enterprise software solutions in the Delaware Chancery Court and Delaware Supreme Court in the trial and appeal of the first case to challenge the validity of a 4.99% shareholder rights plan (or net operating loss “poison pill”), arising from the triggering of the pill and the subsequent dilution of the investor’s holdings.

Online Publications

06/15/2012 - Supreme Court to Again Address Class Certification in Securities Fraud Suits
On Monday, June 11, 2012, the Supreme Court granted a writ of certiorari in Connecticut Retirement Plans and Trust Funds v. Amgen Inc., 660 F.3d 1170 (9th Cir. 2011) to clarify the standards for certifying a class in a securities fraud suit under the fraud-on-the-market theory.

08/22/2011 - Aqua Dots Products Liability Litigation: Company’s Voluntary Reimbursement Plan Defeats Class Certification
On August 17, 2011, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit affirmed a district court’s denial of class certification on the basis that the company’s process for reimbursing purchasers of a defective toy more efficiently distributed refunds to putative class members than a class action lawsuit would.

10/28/2010 - Law360 Case Study: Versata And Trilogy V. Selectica
Recently, in Versata Enterprises Inc. and Trilogy Inc. v. Selectica Inc., the Delaware Supreme Court addressed for the first time the validity of a net operating loss shareholder rights plan (NOL poison pill) and affirmed the Delaware Court of Chancery’s ruling upholding the adoption of an NOL poison pill, rejecting the application of the business judgment rule but nevertheless setting a high bar for shareholders seeking to challenge the adoption and implementation of such pills as a breach of fiduciary duty.

10/06/2010 - Delaware Supreme Court Upholds “NOL” Poison Pill
On Monday, in Versata Enterprises, Inc. and Trilogy, Inc. v. Selectica, Inc., the Delaware Supreme Court addressed for the first time the validity of a net operating loss shareholder rights plan (“NOL poison pill”) and affirmed the Delaware Court of Chancery’s ruling upholding the adoption of an NOL poison pill, rejecting the application of the business judgment rule but nevertheless setting a high bar for shareholders seeking to challenge the adoption and implementation of such pills as a breach of fiduciary duty.

09/07/2010 - SEC Warns Credit Rating Agencies of Increased Fraud Scrutiny
In two actions released last week, the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) signaled its new focus on credit rating agencies and foretold the seriousness with which it will approach the expanded regulatory authority granted to the SEC by the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010 (“Dodd-Frank Act”).

05/07/2010 - Supreme Court Vitiates Statute of Limitations Defense in Fraud Cases
In an opinion issued last week, Merck & Co. v. Reynolds, 559 U.S. __ (2010), the Supreme Court significantly curtailed the ability of defendants to assert the statute of limitations as a defense to a securities fraud claim under § 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The decision makes it less likely that courts will dismiss, on statute of limitations grounds, cases filed within five years of the alleged fraud.

07/30/2009 - Director and Officer Fiduciary Duties in the Context of Insolvency
As a corporation becomes insolvent or is on the brink of insolvency the fiduciary duties usually owed (directly or indirectly) to shareholders may shift, forcing officers and directors to consider the interests
of creditors to prevent creditor claims for breach of fiduciary duty.