| State

Larger text Larger text Smaller text Smaller text | Order Photo Reprints

Newspaper fight awaits judge's call

Daily Photo Galleries

By The Associated Press
Monday, Oct. 28, 2013, 8:42 p.m.

PHILADELPHIA — Feuding owners fought over control of The Philadelphia Inquirer on Monday before a city judge who must decide whether the dispute belongs in her court or in Delaware, where the partners incorporated last year.

If she keeps the case, Judge Patricia McInerney must determine the fate of Publisher Bob Hall and Editor Bill Marimow. Their jobs are in limbo; dueling lawsuits have been filed in recent weeks by the rival owners.

Powerful New Jersey Democrat and insurance magnate George Norcross backs Hall, who recently fired Marimow.

Business tycoons Lewis Katz and H.F. “Gerry” Lenfest support Marimow, a Pulitzer Prize-winner known more for investigative journalism than digital innovation. Katz and Lenfest insist that Hall abused his authority and that his contract had expired in August.

McInerney did not say when she would rule but met privately with Norcross and Katz for more than 30 minutes after a phalanx of high-priced lawyers argued the issues in public.

The newspaper company — which also publishes the Philadelphia Daily News and — has changed hands five times in seven years, a period that included a bitter bankruptcy fight, a public auction and a precipitous price drop from $515 million to $55 million last year.

Katz, the former owner of the New Jersey Nets, kicked in $16 million for a 26 percent stake, but he complained in his lawsuit that he was not consulted about Marimow's firing. He and Norcross make up the two-person management committee charged with steering the company. But it's not clear what happens if they disagree, with no third party to break the tie.

Norcross' precise stake is not clear, but he and three low-profile partners together hold 58 percent of the shares, compared with 42 percent for Katz and Lenfest, according to his countersuit, which seeks to keep the case in Delaware. His lawyer argued that the law states the case should be tried in the state where a company incorporated, absent some “compelling reason.”

“You don't think it's compelling that it's The Philadelphia Inquirer, and this is Philadelphia? And the citizens of Philadelphia could come into the courtroom and listen to the proceedings?” McInerney asked.

She did not rule from the bench on Monday and took the issues under advisement.

Katz declined to comment after the hearing, which Lenfest, Hall and Marimow attended at City Hall. Norcross, in brief remarks, said he hoped the dispute would not detract from the company's mission.

“Our goal from the beginning, (when) we acquired this enterprise, was to make it better for the readership, and better for the region,” he said. “We continue to be hopeful.”

Subscribe today! Click here for our subscription offers.



Show commenting policy

Most-Read Pennsylvania

  1. Trooper severely injured when hit by own car
  2. Public session altered by Wolf
  3. Pa. trooper wounded in barracks ambush hopes to return to force
  4. Impact of Ohio’s moves to reduce Lake Erie algae years away
  5. Man decorating Scranton-area family grave is killed by falling headstone 
  6. PSU president will back tuition freeze if Wolf’s funding plan passes
  7. VA pledges to ease restrictive rules on use of Veterans Choice Access program
  8. Authorities investigate racist letter to Pa. state police pick Brown
  9. Four veterinarians charged for doping race horses at Penn National
  10. Mother, grandparents of starved boy sentenced to prison
  11. Part of Paternos’ case rejected