MSTR hit with class action on Series A Strike Preferred stock changes
Rhea-AI Filing Summary
MicroStrategy (Nasdaq: MSTR/STRK) disclosed in an 8-K that on 21-Jul-2025 a purported stockholder class action was filed in the Delaware Court of Chancery against the company and its board.
The suit alleges that an Amendment to the Certificate of Designations for the 8.00% Series A Perpetual Strike Preferred Stock (STRK) violated DGCL §242 because common shareholders were not given a vote. Plaintiff David Dodge seeks declarations that the Amendment is invalid, that directors breached fiduciary duties, rescission via a corrective filing, and unspecified monetary damages plus fees.
MicroStrategy states it cannot predict the outcome or quantify potential loss. No financial metrics or guidance changes were provided.
Positive
- None.
Negative
- Class action lawsuit alleging DGCL §242 violation and fiduciary-duty breach introduces legal and governance risk.
- Potential monetary damages and requirement to reverse preferred-stock amendment could create unforeseen costs and execution complexity.
Insights
TL;DR: Lawsuit targets alleged voting bypass on preferred-stock amendment; governance risk rises, potential monetary exposure unknown.
The claim centres on whether altering STRK's liquidation preference required a common-holder vote under DGCL §242. If the court deems the Amendment invalid, the company may need to reverse the change and could owe damages and fees, increasing legal costs and distracting management. Alleged fiduciary-duty breaches could also heighten director liability insurance premiums and shareholder activism. While monetary exposure is not yet quantifiable, litigation uncertainty weighs on governance optics and could mildly pressure equity valuations.
TL;DR: New Delaware class action introduces contingent liability; probability and size of loss remain indeterminate.
Chancery actions move quickly; early motions to dismiss or expedite discovery will shape timeline. Relief sought—rescission of the Amendment plus damages—could impact preferred-stock pricing and complicate future capital-markets activity. Absence of settlement reserve signals management views risk as remote or non-estimable under ASC 450, but disclosure acknowledges materiality. Investors should monitor court docket for scheduling orders or rulings on preliminary injunctions that might freeze the contested terms.
UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549
FORM
CURRENT REPORT
PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d)
OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
Date of Report (Date of earliest event reported):
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)
| (State or other jurisdiction of incorporation) |
(Commission File Number) |
(I.R.S. Employer Identification No.) |
| |
||
| (Address of principal executive offices) | (Zip Code) |
Registrant’s telephone number, including area code:
(Former name or former address, if changed since last report)
Check the appropriate box below if the Form 8-K filing is intended to simultaneously satisfy the filing obligation of the registrant under any of the following provisions (see General Instruction A.2. below):
| Written communications pursuant to Rule 425 under the Securities Act (17 CFR 230.425) |
| Soliciting material pursuant to Rule 14a-12 under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.14a-12) |
| Pre-commencement communications pursuant to Rule 14d-2(b) under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.14d-2(b)) |
| Pre-commencement communications pursuant to Rule 13e-4(c) under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.13e-4(c)) |
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:
| Title of Each Class |
Trading |
Name of Each Exchange | ||
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is an emerging growth company as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act of 1933 (§230.405 of this chapter) or Rule 12b-2 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (§240.12b-2 of this chapter).
Emerging growth company
If an emerging growth company, indicate by check mark if the registrant has elected not to use the extended transition period for complying with any new or revised financial accounting standards provided pursuant to Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act. ☐
| Item 8.01 | Other Events. |
On July 21, 2025, a purported class action lawsuit was filed in the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware against us and our board of directors (the “Board”) alleging violations of the Delaware General Corporation Law (the “DGCL”), and asserting a claim against our Board for breach of fiduciary duty in connection with the purported DGCL violation. The plaintiff, David Dodge (the “Plaintiff”), purports to assert claims on behalf of himself and similarly situated holders of our common stock alleging that pursuant to Section 242 of the DGCL (“Section 242”), the holders of our common stock were entitled to vote on the filing of a Certificate of Amendment (the “Amendment”) to the Certificate of Designations for our 8.00% Series A Perpetual Strike Preferred Stock, $0.001 par value per share (the “STRK Stock”), which modified certain terms of the STRK Stock so that, together with other conforming changes, the liquidation preference per share of the STRK Stock generally approximates its trading price with a floor of $100, as described in greater detail in our Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on July 7, 2025. The complaint seeks, among other things, an order (i) finding, determining and declaring that we violated Section 242; (ii) finding, determining and declaring that the Board has breached its fiduciary duties; (iii) deeming the Amendment ineffective and requiring that we file a certificate of correction with the Delaware Secretary of State invalidating the Amendment; (iv) awarding unspecified damages to the Plaintiff and class, including interest, attorneys’ fees, costs; and (v) granting other relief. At this time, we cannot predict the outcome or provide a reasonable estimate or range of estimates of the possible outcome or loss, if any, in this matter.
SIGNATURE
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, the Registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned hereunto duly authorized.
| Date: July 23, 2025 | MicroStrategy Incorporated (Registrant) | |||||
| By: | /s/ W. Ming Shao | |||||
| Name: | W. Ming Shao | |||||
| Title: | Executive Vice President & General Counsel | |||||
FAQ
What triggered the class action against MicroStrategy (MSTR/STRK)?
Which court is hearing the MicroStrategy lawsuit?
What remedies does the plaintiff seek?
Has MicroStrategy estimated potential financial impact?
Does the lawsuit affect MicroStrategy's common or preferred stock?
Were any earnings or guidance figures updated in this 8-K?
