Alphabet Sued for Records Related to Data Breach, Alleged Sexual Misconduct at Google
The lawsuit, made public late Thursday, alleged that there was a "credible basis" to suspect mismanagement at the Mountain View, California-based conglomerate, after a pair of news reports brought the controversies to light last October.
February 08, 2019 at 03:37 PM
4 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Delaware Business Court Insider
An investor in Google's parent company Alphabet Inc. has sued in Delaware Chancery Court for corporate documents related to the company's handling of sexual misconduct allegations against top Google executives and a data breach on the defunct Google+ platform, which reportedly exposed the personal information of nearly 500,000 users.
The lawsuit, made public late Thursday, alleged that there was a “credible basis” to suspect mismanagement at the Mountain View, California-based conglomerate, after a pair of news reports brought the controversies to light last October.
“By demonstrating that Alphabet/Google has a history of ignoring and/or covering up complaints of sexual harassment and discrimination by senior company executives, and that the company and very senior executives made false and misleading statements and/or statements omitting material facts that conceded the company's knowledge of the Google+ security breach, plaintiff has demonstrated a credible basis from which it may be reasonably inferred that mismanagement may have occured,” the complaint said.
In a redacted court filing, Alphabet investor Roger Morrell said he sent a demand letter to company management in November seeking records and board minutes dating back to 2013. Morrell said the documents were needed to assess the board's response to allegations of inappropriate sexual conduct by former executives, as well as when the company learned about the Google+ security breach.
Morrell said that Google initially rejected his demand, but agreed to produce documents if he signed a nondisclosure agreement. According to Morrell, Google turned over 589 pages of mostly redacted material, but little of it covered his request.
Google's press office did not respond to an email Friday seeking comment on the lawsuit.
The New York Times reported Oct. 25 that Andrew E. Rubin, then Google's vice president for mobile and digital content, had resigned from the company with a $90 million severance package and a delayed repayment of a $14 million loan, after allegations surfaced that he had coerced a female Google employee into performing oral sex on him.
According to the article, Rubin and another senior Google executive, Amit Singhal, walked away with hefty severance packages after they were accused of inappropriate sexual behavior. A third executive, accused of propositioning a female engineer who was interviewing for a job, left the company Oct. 30, shortly after article was published, but did not receive a severance package, Morrell said in his complaint.
In the wake of The New York Times' reporting, Google employees and contractors staged a walkout to protest sexual harassment and misconduct, as well as a lack of transparency and noninclusive workplace culture.
The other incident at the center of Morrell's lawsuit, first reported by The Wall Street Journal, involved the Google's allegedly delayed response to a glitch in the software for Google+, the company's social media site, which allowed outside developers to access users' profile data. According to the Oct. 8 report, Google knew as early as March that the glitch had allowed third-party app developers to access the full names, email addresses, birth dates, gender and photos of users but decided not to publicly disclose the problem amid fears that it would spark “immediate regulatory interest” at a time when Facebook had already been under scrutiny for the Cambridge Analytica data breach.
On the same day The Wall Street Journal published its report, the company announced that it was terminating Google+ for consumers but said it had found no evidence of misuse.
Morrell is represented by Brian D. Long, Seth D. Rigrodsky and Gina M. Serra of Rigrodsky & Long in Wilmington and Joshua H. Grabar of Grabar in Philadelphia.
According to an online docket-tracking service, Alphabet is represented by Lori W. Will, Jessica A. Hartwell and Jessica Peuscher-Funk of Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati in Wilmington.
The case, captioned Morrell v. Alphabet, has been assigned to Vice Chancellor Kathaleen S. McCormick.
Read more: Far From 'Slam Dunk,' Google Shareholder Suits Latest in Wave of #MeToo Derivative ActionsThis content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllJoseph Saveri Law Firm, Co-Counsel File 9th Circuit Appeal in Lawsuit Targeting GitHub's Use of Code to Train AI Models
GCs Face Peril as Foreign Bribery Probes Second-Guess 'Routine' Advice
14-State Coalition Sues TikTok, Alleging Addictive Algorithms Trigger Mental Health Harms in Adolescents
NY Federal Judge Rules Online-Only Retailers Cannot Face ADA Claims
Trending Stories
Who Got The Work
Dechert partners Andrew J. Levander, Angela M. Liu and Neil A. Steiner have stepped in to defend Arbor Realty Trust and certain executives in a pending securities class action. The complaint, filed July 31 in New York Eastern District Court by Levi & Korsinsky, contends that the defendants concealed a 'toxic' mobile home portfolio, vastly overstated collateral in regards to the company's loans and failed to disclose an investigation of the company by the FBI. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Pamela K. Chen, is 1:24-cv-05347, Martin v. Arbor Realty Trust, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Arthur G. Jakoby, Ryan Feeney and Maxim M.L. Nowak from Herrick Feinstein have stepped in to defend Charles Dilluvio and Seacor Capital in a pending securities lawsuit. The complaint, filed Sept. 30 in New York Southern District Court by the Securities and Exchange Commission, accuses the defendants of using consulting agreements, attorney opinion letters and other mechanisms to skirt regulations limiting stock sales by affiliate companies and allowing the defendants to unlawfully profit from sales of Enzolytics stock. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Andrew L. Carter Jr., is 1:24-cv-07362, Securities and Exchange Commission v. Zhabilov et al.
Who Got The Work
Clark Hill members Vincent Roskovensky and Kevin B. Watson have entered appearances for Architectural Steel and Associated Products in a pending environmental lawsuit. The complaint, filed Aug. 27 in Pennsylvania Eastern District Court by Brodsky & Smith on behalf of Hung Trinh, accuses the defendant of discharging polluted stormwater from its steel facility without a permit in violation of the Clean Water Act. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Gerald J. Pappert, is 2:24-cv-04490, Trinh v. Architectural Steel And Associated Products, Inc.
Who Got The Work
Michael R. Yellin of Cole Schotz has entered an appearance for S2 d/b/a the Shoe Surgeon, Dominic Chambrone a/k/a Dominic Ciambrone and other defendants in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The case, filed July 15 in New York Southern District Court by DLA Piper on behalf of Nike, seeks to enjoin Ciambrone and the other defendants in their attempts to build an 'entire multifaceted' retail empire through their unauthorized use of Nike’s trademark rights. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Naomi Reice Buchwald, is 1:24-cv-05307, Nike Inc. v. S2, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Sullivan & Cromwell partner Adam S. Paris has entered an appearance for Orthofix Medical in a pending securities class action arising from a proposed acquisition of SeaSpine by Orthofix. The suit, filed Sept. 6 in California Southern District Court, by Girard Sharp and the Hall Firm, contends that the offering materials and related oral communications contained untrue statements of material fact. According to the complaint, the defendants made a series of misrepresentations about Orthofix’s disclosure controls and internal controls over financial reporting and ethical compliance. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Linda Lopez, is 3:24-cv-01593, O'Hara v. Orthofix Medical Inc. et al.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250