WALLACE COMPUTER SERVICES INC
DFAN14A, 1996-09-20
MANIFOLD BUSINESS FORMS
Previous: WALLACE COMPUTER SERVICES INC, PRRN14A, 1996-09-20
Next: WELLS FARGO & CO, 424B5, 1996-09-20




<PAGE>
<PAGE>
                           SCHEDULE 14A INFORMATION 

             Proxy Statement Pursuant to Section 14(a) of the Securities
                       Exchange Act of 1934 (Amendment No.    )

          Filed by the Registrant [ ]
          Filed by a Party other than the Registrant [X]


          Check the appropriate box:

          [ ]  Preliminary Proxy Statement
          [ ]  Confidential, for Use of the Commission Only (as permitted by
               Rule 14a-6(e)(2))
          [ ]  Definitive Proxy Statement
          [X]  Definitive Additional Materials
          [ ]  Soliciting Material Pursuant to Section 240.14a-11(c) or
               Section 240.14a-12

                            WALLACE COMPUTER SERVICES, INC.
          .................................................................
                   (Name of Registrant as Specified In Its Charter)

                                 GUY P. WYSER-PRATTE
          .................................................................
       (Name of Person(s) Filing Proxy Statement, if other than the Registrant)


          Payment of Filing Fee (Check the appropriate box):

          [ ]  $125 per Exchange Act Rules 0-11(c)(1)(ii), 14a-6(i)(1),
               14a-6(i)(2) or Item 22(a)(2) of Schedule 14A.
          [ ]  $500 per each party to the controversy pursuant to Exchange
               Act Rule 14a-6(i)(3).
          [ ]  Fee computed on table below per Exchange Act Rules 
               14a-6(i)(4) and 0-11.

               1)  Title of each class of securities to which transaction
          applies:
                    
          .................................................................

               2)  Aggregate number of securities to which transaction
          applies:
                    
          .................................................................

               3)  Per unit price or other underlying value of transaction
          computed   pursuant to Exchange Act Rule 0-11 (Set forth the
          amount on which the filing fee is calculated and state how it was
          determined):
                     
          .................................................................

               4)  Proposed maximum aggregate value of transaction:
                    
          .................................................................

               5)  Total fee paid:
                  
          .................................................................

          [X]  Fee paid previously with preliminary materials.

          [ ]  Check box if any part of the fee is offset as provided by
               Exchange Act Rule 0-11(a)(2) and identify the filing for
               which the offsetting fee was paid previously.  Identify the
               previous filing by registration statement number, or the
               Form or Schedule and the date of its filing.

               1)   Amount Previously Paid:
                     
          .................................................................

               2)   Form, Schedule or Registration Statement No.:

          .................................................................

               3)   Filing Party:

          .................................................................

               4)   Date Filed:

          .................................................................

<PAGE>
<PAGE>



CONTACT:

Stanley J. Kay
MacKenzie Partners, Inc.
(212) 929-5940

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:

         WYSER-PRATTE FILES COMPLAINT AGAINST WALLACE COMPUTER SERVICES
                  Claims Violations of Federal and Delaware Law

NEW YORK,  NEW YORK,  September  20, 1996 -- Guy P.  Wyser-Pratte,  President of
Wyser-Pratte & Co., Inc.,  announced today that he has filed a complaint against
Wallace Computer  Services,  Inc. (NYSE:  WCS) in Federal District Court for the
Northern District of Illinois.

Mr.  Wyser-Pratte's  lawsuit  alleges,  among  other  things,  that  Wallace has
violated Federal securities laws by publicly  disseminating false and misleading
statements in its preliminary proxy materials.

Specifically,  the complaint alleges that Wallace has falsely declared "invalid"
and  would  refuse  to enact if  approved  by  stockholders  a by-law  amendment
to be  submitted  by  Mr. Wyser- Pratte for  consideration  by  shareholders  at
Wallace's upcoming annual meeting scheduled for November 6, 1996.

The complaint further states that Wallace's position -- that it would  not enact
the  by-law  even  if  approved  by  stockholders -- is  an illegal action under
Delaware law and that  Wallace  seeks  to mislead it  shareholders by pretending
otherwise.

Mr.  Wyser-Pratte's  by-law  proposal,  if enacted,  would  require the Board of
Directors  to obtain  stockholder  approval  of any  decision  to sustain  Board
opposition past a 90-day period for any qualified, premium, all cash, all shares
tender offer. If stockholder  approval is not obtained,  the Board would have to
cease its opposition to the offer.

Significantly,  nothing in the  proposed  by-law  purports  to limit the Board's
ability to oppose a premium offer by persuading  stockholders  that the offer is
not in their best interests or by seeking a higher,  better offer.  In fact, the
proposal  facilitates  free  and  frank  discussion  as well as the  pursuit  of
alternative  proposals by providing a 90-day period in which to seek stockholder
approval.   The  proposed  by-law   merely   requires  the  involvement  of  the
stockholders  -- on whose behalf the Board purports to act -- in the decision to
reject a qualified premium offer.

                                    - more -

<PAGE>

<PAGE>



Wyser-Pratte & Co., Inc.
September 20, 1996
Page Two

Mr.  Wyser-Pratte   commented,   "This  by-law  proposal  seeks  to  restore  to
stockholders  their fundamental  right - recognized in jurisdictions  around the
world - to decide  whether  to sell  their  shares in  response  to a  qualified
premium offer.  Wallace's vehement opposition and proclamation that it would not
adopt the by-law even if properly  enacted only  demonstrates  the importance of
this proposal."

"I believe," Mr. Wyser-Pratte continued,  "that Wallace's  misrepresentations in
it proxy materials seeks to rig the election and avoid a fair  stockholder  vote
upon this  matter.  Wallace  further  seeks to  deceive  its  stockholders  into
believing  that they are  powerless  to enact this  by-law  proposal  -- a clear
violation of Delaware law which should be properly addressed by the Court."

The   Wyser-Pratte   complaint   seeks  both  to  halt  Wallace's   campaign  of
misrepresentations  and a  declaration  of  Wallace's  obligation  to  follow  a
duly-enacted by-law.

                                      # # #


NOTE TO EDITORS: For a copy of Mr. Wyser-Pratte's complaint, please
                 contact Stan Kay at MacKenzie Partners, Inc. at
                 800/322-2885.

                             PARTICIPANT INFORMATION

Mr. Wyser-Pratte is the owner of 8,000 shares of Wallace common stock and may be
deemed to be the  beneficial  owner of an additional  1,049,000  common  shares.
Together,  these shares account for approximately 2.3% of Wallace's  outstanding
common shares.  Mr.  Wyser-Pratte's  nominees for election to the Wallace Board,
Messrs.  William M. Frazier and W. Michael Frazier are the respective beneficial
owners of 1,000 and 600 common shares. Eric Longmire, of Wyser-Pratte, is also a
participant in this solicitation




© 2022 IncJournal is not affiliated with or endorsed by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission