Tensions have intensified between Magnum Ice Cream Company and members of Ben & Jerry’s board amid ongoing disputes over the company’s ownership and political stance. Magnum, which owns Ben & Jerry’s, has publicly accused Anuradha Mittal, a former board member who resigned earlier this year, of engaging in abusive, discriminatory, and unprofessional behavior.

The conflict stems from a series of board resignations in protest against Magnum’s ownership. Magnum alleges that Mittal violated her fiduciary duties by using hostile and derogatory language during the dispute. A company statement described her conduct as “repeatedly using derogatory language that was hostile, aggressive, disrespectful and acrimonious.”

Mittal’s legal counsel has strongly denied these accusations, dismissing them as “extreme personal slander” and defending her actions as appropriate within the context of the disagreements.

The disagreement also highlights deeper divisions within Magnum’s shareholder base. Nelson Peltz, a significant investor holding 3.7 percent of Magnum’s stock, remains firm on the company’s position regarding the political issues connected to Israel and Palestine, one of the central points of contention fueling the broader dispute.

Despite ongoing negotiations, there appears to be little immediate prospect for resolution between the parties. The escalating conflict underscores the challenges faced by companies navigating complex political and corporate governance issues intertwined with shareholder activism.