Features

SAN JOSE – Hewlett-Packard Co. heir Walter Hewlett fell way short of proving his lawsuit against the company and should just admit he lost his fight to stop the Compaq Computer Corp. acquisition, HP attorneys argued in a scathing legal brief. 

The brief, filed Friday night and released by HP on Saturday, was the equivalent of a closing argument after a three-day trial that ended Thursday in Wilmington, Del. 

Hewlett delivered no proof HP lied about the chances the Compaq deal could achieve its publicly released financial goals, the attorneys said. He also offered no tangible evidence that HP threatened Deutsche Bank or coerced its investment managers into switching 17 million shares in favor of the deal, the brief said. 

“They are pitching the bribery claim as a ’circumstantial’ case with the subtlety and intrigue of an Oliver Stone screenplay,” the HP attorneys wrote. 

“Carly Fiorina’s philosophy in connection with this merger has been ’under-promise and over-deliver,”’ the brief said, referring to the HP CEO’s testimony that the Compaq deal actually should exceed its stated goals. “Plaintiffs’ performance in this lawsuit has been to ’over-promise and under-deliver.”’ 

Attorneys for Hewlett, whose 15-year tenure on the HP board ended Friday, also filed a post-trial brief with the court but had not released copies to reporters by Saturday afternoon. 

Hewlett sued HP in Chancery Court in Delaware, where HP is incorporated, in hopes of overturning the March 19 shareholder vote that HP won 51.4 percent to 48.6 percent, according to a preliminary tally yet to be made official.