Don’t forget you can visit MyAlerts to manage your alerts at any time.
1,623 results for '* court:"Court of Chancery"' You can use Search Constraints to get even better search results
Publication Date: 2022-07-19
Practice Area: Contractual Disputes
Industry: Software
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Vice Chancellor Glasscock
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Steven P. Wood, Andrew S. Dupre, Travis J. Ferguson, McCarter & English, LLP, Wilmington, DE; Julie B. Porter, Salvatore Prescott Porter & Porter, Evanston, IL for plaintiff.
for defendant: Kevin M. Gallagher, Caroline M. McDonough, Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Sarah A. Zielinski, Amy Starinieri Gilbert, McGuireWoods LLP, Chicago, IL for defendants.
Case Number: D69886
Option grant was interpreted to grant employer the right to call exercised options following the employee's termination or following the employee's breach of their restrictive covenants; both events were not required to have occurred for the right to be available.
Publication Date: 2022-07-12
Practice Area: Mergers and Acquisitions
Industry: Financial Services and Banking | Food and Beverage
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Vice Chancellor Zurn
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Kevin R. Shannon, Christopher N. Kelly, Emma K. Diver, Potter Anderson & Corroon LLP, Wilmington, DE; John E. Schreiber, Aaron C. O’Dell, Winston & Strawn LLP, Los Angeles, CA for plaintiff.
for defendant: A. Thompson Bayliss, April M. Kirby, Abrams & Bayliss LLP, Wilmington, DE; Timothy R. Farrell, Ropes & Gray LLP, Chicago, IL; Patrick S. Doherty, Ropes & Gray LLP, London, UK; Sarah M. Milkovich, Ropes & Gray LLP, Boston, MA for defendants.
Case Number: D69878
Seller sufficiently alleged breach of written and oral contracts where merger agreement required buyer to complete pre-closing tax returns according to past practices and buyer instead used novel practices, but the change in practices was authorized by the parties' oral agreement in which the seller agreed to the change in exchange for receipt of the tax return proceeds.
Publication Date: 2022-07-12
Practice Area: Insurance Law
Industry: Insurance
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Chancellor Wharton
Attorneys: For plaintiff: R. Bruce McNew, Cooch and Taylor, P.A., Wilmington, DE for plaintiff.
for defendant: Tiffany Geyer Lydon, Ashby & Geddes, Wilmington, DE; David T. McDowell, Robert P. Debelak, Avi Moshenberg, Mcdowell & Heatherington LLP, Houston, TX for defendants.
Case Number: D69881
Laches barred life insurance contract reformation claim where defendant insurer had expressly stated years prior that it intended to rely on an interpretation of the policy contrary to the parties' previous understanding.
Publication Date: 2022-07-12
Practice Area: Corporate Governance
Industry: Automotive | E-Commerce | Investments and Investment Advisory
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Chancellor McCormick
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Nathan A. Cook, Block & Leviton LLP, Wilmington, DE; Christine M. Mackintosh, Rebecca A. Musarra, Grant & Eisenhofer P.A., Wilmington, DE; Ned Weinberger, Labaton Sucharow LLP, Wilmington, DE; Jason M. Leviton, Joel A. Fleming, Lauren Godles Milgroom, Amanda R. Crawford, Block & Leviton LLP, Boston, MA; Domenico Minerva, John Vielandi, David MacIsaac, Labaton Sucharow LLP, New York, NY for plaintiffs.
for defendant: David E. Ross, Adam D. Gold, R. Garrett Rice, Ross Aronstam & Moritz LLP, Wilmington, DE; Brian M. Lutz, Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP, San Francisco, CA; Colin B. Davis, Katie Beaudin, Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP, Irvine, CA; John L. Reed, Ronald N. Brown, III, Peter H. Kyle, Kelly L. Freund, DLA Piper LLP (US), Wilmington, DE for defendants.
Case Number: D69879
Stockholders sufficiently pled director conflict and lack of independence by alleging numerous personal and professional ties stretching back decades between the directors and the company's controlling family.
Publication Date: 2022-07-12
Practice Area: Real Estate
Industry: Real Estate | State and Local Government
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Vice Chancellor Glasscock
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Gerald I.H. Street, John I. Ellis, Street & Ellis, P.A., Dover, DE; Bradley S. Eaby, State of Delaware Department of Justice, Dover, DE for petitioner.
for defendant: Richard P. Beck, Richard Beck LLC, Centreville, DE; John H. Newcomer, Jr., Morris James LLP, Wilmington, DE for respondents.
Case Number: D69880
Motion to equitably divest the state from its superior title to a parcel under the doctrine of acquiescence denied where there was no evidence to charge the state with knowledge of competing party's possessory acts such that the state could be said to have acquiesced to such acts.
Law Journal Press | Digital Book
Authors:
View this BookView more book results for the query "*"
Publication Date: 2022-07-12
Practice Area: Corporate Governance
Industry: Entertainment and Leisure
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Vice Chancellor Fioravanti
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Jon E. Abramczyk, Sabrina M. Hendershot, Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP, Wilmington, DE; Daniel H. Shapira, Robert M. Barnes, Daniel J. Stuart, Marcus & Shapira LLP, Pittsburgh, PA for plaintiff.
for defendant: Kurt M. Heyman, Jamie L. Brown, Heyman Enerio Gattuso & Hirzel LLP, Wilmington, DE; Patricia L. Glaser, Craig H. Marcus, Nathaniel Wright, Glaser Weil Howard Avchen & Shapiro LLP, Los Angeles, CA for defendants.
Case Number: D69882
Professional sports league constitution required arbitration of ownership interest disputes before the league commissioner, and was not superseded by the team owners' partnership agreement since the league was not a party to that partnership agreement.
Publication Date: 2022-07-05
Practice Area: Corporate Entities
Industry: E-Commerce | Investments and Investment Advisory | Real Estate
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Vice Chancellor Laster
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Stephen B. Brauerman, Sarah T. Andrade, Bayard, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Christopher O. Murray, Julian R. Ellis, Jr., Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck, LLP, Denver, CO for plaintiffs.
for defendant: Matthew F. Davis, Justin T. Hymes, Potter Anderson & Corroon LLP, Wilmington, DE; Charles F. Connolly, Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld, Washington, DC; Stephen M. Baldini, Stephanie Lindemuth, Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld, New York, NY for defendants.
Case Number: D69872
Partner who was removed from joint venture plausibly alleged that co-venturer improperly asserted cause to exercise its removal rights, thereby constituting a non-exculpated breach of the joint venture agreement.
Publication Date: 2022-07-05
Practice Area: Corporate Governance
Industry: Biotechnology | Investments and Investment Advisory
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Vice Chancellor Fioravanti
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Samuel T. Hirzel, II, Jamie L. Brown, Heyman Enerio Gattuso & Hirzel LLP, Wilmington, DE; Adam C. Ford, Matthew A. Ford, Ford O’Brien, LLP, New York, NY for plaintiffs.
for defendant: Elena C. Norman, Young Conaway Stargatt & Taylor LLP, Wilmington, DE; Deborah S. Birnbach, Jennifer Burns Luz, Matthew T. White, Goodwin Proctor LLP, Boston, MA; Kevin R. Shannon, Jaclyn C. Levy, Callan R. Jackson, Potter Anderson & Corroon LLP, Wilmington, DE; Seth Goldman, Jacob H. Hupart, Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky and Popeo, P.C., New York, NY for defendants.
Case Number: D69871
Breach of fiduciary duty claim against company CEO dismissed where there were no factual allegations regarding the actual steps the CEO purportedly took to block plaintiff stockholders' efforts to sell their shares or that the CEO was even aware plaintiffs were seeking to transfer their stock.
Publication Date: 2022-07-05
Practice Area: Class Actions
Industry: Investments and Investment Advisory | Technology Media and Telecom
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Vice Chancellor Glasscock
Attorneys: For plaintiff: R. Bruce McNew, Cooch and Taylor, P.A., Wilmington, DE for plaintiffs.
for defendant: David A. Dorey, Blank Rome LLP, Wilmington, DE; Christopher M. Mason, Nixon Peabody LLP, New York, NY; Carolyn G. Nussbaum, Nixon Peabody LLP, Rochester, NY for defendants.
Case Number: D69870
Court certified class of stockholders challenging self-tender transaction for misleading corporate disclosures, where certification was appropriate for the purposes of establish breach of duty and nominal damages, although the question of rescission damages would be individual to each stockholder.
Publication Date: 2022-06-21
Practice Area: Mergers and Acquisitions
Industry: Energy | Investments and Investment Advisory
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Vice Chancellor Glasscock
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Rolin P. Bissell, Paul J. Loughman, Alberto E. Chávez, Young Conaway Stargatt & Taylor, LLP, Wilmington, DE; D. Patrick Long, Jonathan R. Mureen, John Tancabel, Squire Patton Boggs (US) LLP, Dallas, TX for plaintiffs.
for defendant: Albert H. Manwaring IV, Kirsten Zeberkiewicz, Morris James LLP, Wilmington, DE; Robert A. Van Kirk, Sarah F. Kirkpatrick, Lauren Uhlig, Williams & Connolly LLP, Washington, DC for defendants.
Case Number: D69857
Plaintiffs sufficiently pled breach of fiduciary duty claims by alleging that controlling stockholder, who also controlled a majority of the board, was conflicted due to its desire to cash out its investment, which purportedly led it to approve a sale of the company that maximized the controller's return at the expense of the compensation to minority stockholders.
Legal Speak is a weekly podcast that makes sense of what’s happening in the legal industry.
1 minute read