Relmada Therapeutics deal turns sour with Laidlaw

As a clinical-stage company that focuses on developing novel therapies for the treatment of chronic pain, Relmada Therapeutics recently announced that it had gone to the United States District Court for the District of Nevada to amend its complaint against Laidlaw and Company.

The firm had initially gone to the Nevada District Court suing Laidlaw. Laidlaw was the firm’s investment banker and disclosed confidential information. Their official capacity allowed them to access sensitive information and they were not supposed to make it public at any instant. The current amendment includes a legal claim based on the fiduciary duty that it owed to Relmada.

Nevada court had previously issued a temporary restraining order against Laidlaw’s principles Matthew Eitner and James Ahern. Relmada’s Board strongly believe that they must be compensated off their losses and Laidlaw prevented from harming any individual or institution in the future.

Relmada decided to write to their clients about their intended actions while also highlighting their success so far. This includes;

• Coming up with positive results of BuTab hence better treatment of opioid dependence indications and chronic pain. This is a billion dollar market opportunity.
• Completion of the multiple ascending dose study with d-Methadone. This is majorly related to neuropathic pain.
• Appointment of a leading pharmaceutical to the advisory team.

Laidlaw began being the Company’s primary investment banker in December 2011. In mid-2015, Laidlaw and Relmada started discussing on the possibility of attracting new investors. Laidlaw then organized a non-deal road show and confidentially discussed with the firm about future prospects of the business while introducing the company to several institutional investors.

1 thought on “Relmada Therapeutics deal turns sour with Laidlaw”

  1. They are also looking for monetary damages that came up due to the costs and fees incurred while responding to Laidlaw’s misleading and false proxy materials in December 2015. I also like the fact that superiorpaper review offered the thing materials to them that they should come defend it now.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *