A recent court filing has shed light on a high-stakes legal battle involving a major financial services technology company. On February 3, 2026, Gary Peterson filed a verified shareholder derivative complaint in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin against several officers and directors of Fiserv, Inc. The lawsuit accuses these individuals of violating securities laws, breaching fiduciary duties, wasting corporate assets, and unjust enrichment.
According to the complaint, Fiserv is accused of artificially inflating its growth figures by forcibly migrating up to 200,000 merchants from its older payment gateway system, Payeezy, to its flagship product Clover. This migration allegedly boosted revenue figures temporarily but was unsustainable as many cost-conscious merchants eventually left for cheaper alternatives. The plaintiff alleges that Fiserv’s executives misled investors about the source of Clover’s growth by claiming it was driven by new customer acquisitions rather than these forced migrations. During this period of alleged misinformation, Fiserv repurchased over $6.9 billion worth of its own stock at inflated prices and certain insiders sold over $44.2 million worth of their shares while possessing material nonpublic information.
The complaint details how market revelations gradually exposed the truth about Clover’s financial health. A significant decline in gross payment volume (GPV) growth rates was reported during an earnings call on April 24, 2025, leading to an 18.5% drop in Fiserv’s market capitalization overnight. Further disclosures in May and July 2025 continued to reveal financial instability within Clover’s operations resulting in substantial market value losses.
Plaintiff Gary Peterson is seeking various forms of relief from the court including damages for reputational harm and loss of goodwill suffered by Fiserv due to these alleged actions. The lawsuit also demands improvements in corporate governance practices within Fiserv to prevent future misconduct.
Representing Peterson are attorneys whose names were not disclosed in the document; however, Sullivan & Cromwell LLP is mentioned as counsel for Fiserv’s Board regarding a litigation demand related to this case. The presiding judge for this case is yet unnamed but it carries the Case ID: 2:26-cv-00183-BHL.
Source: 226cv00183_Peterson_v_Lyons_Complaint_Eastern_District_Wisconsin.pdf
