Legal Opinion

Speirs v. BlueFire Ethanol Fuels CA4/3

California Court of Appeal

Decided December 21, 2015No. G048698UnpublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

IKOLA, J.-

— Plaintiffs held warrants (i.e., options to buy common stock from a corporation at a particular price by a particular date) issued by defendant BlueFire Ethanol Fuels, Inc. The warrants included an anti-dilution provision, requiring BlueFire to adjust the exercise price set in the warrants “to equal the consideration paid” by a subsequent investor for equity interests in BlueFire. But the anti-dilution provision did not apply to certain issuances of securities, as specified in a list of five categories of exceptions.

A few years after issuance of the warrants, BlueFire…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. Kenford Co. v. County of ErieNew York Court of Appeals · 1986
  2. Jones v. H. F. Ahmanson & Co.California Supreme Court · 1969
  3. Reiss v. Financial Performance Corp.New York Court of Appeals · 2001
  4. Gentile v. RossetteSupreme Court of Delaware · 2006
  5. Feldman v. CutaiaSupreme Court of Delaware · 2008

14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Ctr. for Biological Diversity v. Dep't of Conservation, California Court of Appeal, 5th District2018
  2. Ameris Bank v. 2 Sons Trucking LLCDistrict Court, C.D. California · 2025
  3. Ameris Bank v. M and T Transport LLCDistrict Court, C.D. California · 2025
  4. Borja-Atalig v. VersarioSuperior Court of Guam · 2024
  5. Center for Biological Diversity v. Dept. of ConservationCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2018

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API