I finally have the Yarro Complaint in Yarro et al v. Kreidel et al. Well, most of it. The fax was missing several pages, but rather than make you wait, I'll put up what I have and supplement as I get the rest, hopefully. If you are on dialup, it's a long download. I'll try to fix that later. It's enough to give us the idea of what is going on.
UPDATE: Here is the complete complaint, and slimmed down for an easier download.
In a nutshell, Yarro and the others who "resigned" from Canopy say Noorda meant to give them millions and millions (and in some cases part ownership of the company) instead of to his children. You see, it was like this: Yarro was such a valuable employee that Noorda wished to keep him there, and apparently it required millions in perks to retain his services. It was all on the up-and-up, and it is only now, when they say Noorda is incompetent -- and they have their doubts about Mrs. Noorda too, and they'd like competency hearings on the matter -- that one daughter, Val Noorda Kreidel, is causing trouble for them unfairly, I guess out of greed. Um. OK. But one question: since the beneficiaries when her parents die are two charities, what greedy motive can she possibly have? 'Tis a puzzlement.
Here are two of the affidavits, the one by Joyce Wiley and the one by Brent Christensen. The rest I will put up as I am able. They all say essentially the same things: they resigned because Mr. Mustard is a meanie who yells at employees, so mean he didn't say Christmas greetings to the staff and made some of them cry (they claim one was allegedly driven to suicide), they had to sign some document they don't describe or identify with particularity under "duress", and now the company can't possibly live without them.
Portfolio companies, like you know who, I presume, are worried about continued money flowing to them from Canopy. Darl, I've heard, has put in an affidavit that is sealed, but I haven't yet been able to confirm that detail. No one ever heard Noorda say a critical word about Yarro, Mott or Christensen in all the happy years together in the Canopy family. They no longer have access to the computers. No one else can possibly do the taxes, etc. for Canopy. If the three are reinstated, as their complaint requests happen, and the gravy train starts running again, they'd be happy to go back to work for Canopy Group. If you wish to compare, here is the Canopy/Kreidel complaint against Yarro and friends. It portrays the same general facts as self-dealing and wasteful transactions, as well as a power struggle to gain control of Canopy, as Bob Mims' article highlights.
If you wish to read the media version, here's an article by the Daily Herald's Grace Leong, and she says the document was an NDA. One affidavit describes it as a "settlement". atul666 has done some research on the SCOX Finance message board on various Canopy employees who also provided affidavits or are mentioned in the lawsuits. I've saved the best for last, Frank Hayes' opinion piece in ComputerWorld. He finds it hard to believe Noorda is incompetent, and he thinks what happens next is the lawsuits against customers, like AutoZone and Daimler Chrysler, will disappear. Noorda, he thinks, would never lose his business sense enough to sue his own customers, and he calls his article, "Ray's Return."
Honestly, does it get any uglier than this? Maybe in Greek tragedies. This is a quintessential American tragedy, however. By that I mean, it's all about money.