Don’t forget you can visit MyAlerts to manage your alerts at any time.
Publication Date: 2024-04-15
Practice Area: Contracts
Industry: Construction | Real Estate
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Vice Chancellor Zurn
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Nathan D. Barillo, Fox Rothschild LLP, Wilmington, DE for plaintiffs.
for defendant: Edward J. Fornias, III, Law Office of EJ Fornias, P.A., Wilmington, DE for defendants.
Case Number: 2020-0745-MTZ
Court declined to enforce a settlement against defendants' affiliates who were non-parties to the underlying action, as Ct. Ch. R. 71 could not supply an independent basis to extend jurisdiction over non-parties in the absence of due process.
Publication Date: 2024-04-15
Practice Area: Bankruptcy
Industry: Education | Technology Media and Telecom
Court: U.S. Bankruptcy Court
Judge: Judge Dorsey
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 24-10140 (JTD)
Court could issue preliminary injunctive relief to freeze funds at issue in a fraudulent transfer claim where state law authorized prejudgment attachment and equitable claims also provided a basis to issue preliminary equitable relief.
Publication Date: 2024-04-15
Practice Area: Labor Law
Industry: Manufacturing
Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
Judge: District Judge Fallon
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Thomas S. Neuberger, Stephen J. Neuberger, The Neuberger Firm, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Timothy P. Rumberger, Law Offices of Timothy P. Rumberger, Alameda, CA for plaintiffs.
for defendant: Samuel L. Moultrie, Renee Mosley Delcollo, Greenberg Traurig, LLP, Wilmington, DE; Justin K. Victor, Greenberg Traurig, LLP, Atlanta, GA for defendants.
Case Number: 22-1582-SRF
Court dismissed Fair Labor Standards Act claims to the extent they sought overtime "gap time" pay where the statute did not expressly provide relief for such pay.
Publication Date: 2024-04-15
Practice Area: Mergers and Acquisitions
Industry: E-Commerce | Investments and Investment Advisory | Technology Media and Telecom
Court: Delaware Supreme Court
Judge: Justice Seitz
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Michael Hanrahan, J. Clayton Athey, Corinne Elise Amato, Kevin H. Davenport, Stacey A. Greenspan, Jason W. Rigby, Prickett, Jones & Elliott, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Lee D. Rudy, Eric L. Zagar, J. Daniel Albert, Maria T. Starling, Kessler Topaz Meltzer & Check, LLP, Radnor, PA; Robert D. Klausner, Klausner, Kaufman, Jensen & Levinson, Plantation, FL for appellants.
for defendant: William M. Lafferty, John P. DiTomo, Elizabeth A. Mullin, Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP, Wilmington, DE; Theodore N. Mirvis, Jonathan M. Moses, Ryan A. McLeod, Alexandra P. Sadinsky, Canem Ozyildirim, Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz, New York, NY; Blake Rohrbacher, Matthew W. Murphy, Sandy Xu, Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Maeve O’Connor, Susan R. Gittes, Amy C. Zimmerman, Debevoise & Plimpton LLP, New York, NY; David E. Ross, Adam D. Gold, Ross Aronstam & Moritz LLP, Wilmington, DE; Joshua G. Hamilton, Meryn C.N. Grant, Latham & Watkins LLP, Los Angeles, CA; Blair Connelly, Latham & Watkins LLP, New York, NY; Michele D. Johnson, Latham & Watkins LLP, Costa Mesa, CA for appellees.
Case Number: 368, 2022
Chancery court erroneously applied business judgment rule to review transaction where controlling stockholder stood on both sides and received a non-ratable benefit where not all members of the company's separation committee were independent from the controller.
Publication Date: 2024-04-15
Practice Area: Contractual Disputes
Industry: Health Care
Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
Judge: District Judge Noreika
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Andrew L. Cole, Stacy L. Newman, Jack M. Dougherty, Cole Schotz P.C., Wilmington, DE; Ryan J. Morley, John W. Hofstetter, Littler Mendelson, P.C., Cleveland, OH for plaintiffs.
for defendant: Daniel C. Herr, Law Office of Daniel C. Herr, LLC, Wilmington, DE; David E. Rothstein, Rothstein Law Firm, PA, Greenville, SC for defendant.
Case Number: 22-319 (MN)
Although court found most of former employee's restrictive covenants enforceable as reasonably tailored to protect employer's legitimate economic interests, it granted employee judgment where former employer failed to present evidence at trial proving that employee breached any enforceable covenant.
Law Journal Press | Digital Book
Authors: Michael R. Griffinger, Paul F. Cullum III
View this BookView more book results for the query "*"
Publication Date: 2024-04-08
Practice Area: Corporate Governance
Industry: Investments and Investment Advisory | Pharmaceuticals
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Vice Chancellor Will
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Kevin M. Gallagher, Andrew L. Milam, Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A., Wilmington, DE, attorneys for plaintiff.
for defendant: Lisa M. Zwally, Greenberg Traurig, LLP, Wilmington, DE, attorney for defendant.
Case Number: 2023-1044-LWW
Purported written consent in lieu of a meeting could not moot stockholders' request for an annual meeting where the law required the removal of incumbent directors before a non-unanimous written consent could fill the vacancies.
Publication Date: 2024-04-08
Practice Area: Corporate Entities
Industry: Investments and Investment Advisory | Software
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Vice Chancellor Glasscock
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Sean J. Bellew, Bellew LLC, Wilmington, DE; Scott C. McAdam, Law Office of Scott C. McAdam, Henderson, NV for plaintiffs.
for defendant: Sean A. Meluney, William M. Alleman, Jr., Stephen A. Spence, Meluney Alleman & Spence, LLC, Lewes, DE for defendants.
Case Number: 2022-0861-SG
Court declined to dismiss declaratory judgment and breach of contract claims where plaintiff adequately alleged that defendants failed to fulfill their contractual obligations to provide plaintiff with his creditor and equity rights.
Publication Date: 2024-04-08
Practice Area: Corporate Governance
Industry: E-Commerce | Investments and Investment Advisory | Software
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Vice Chancellor Fioravanti
Attorneys: For plaintiff: A. Thompson Bayliss, Eric A. Veres, Abrams & Bayliss LLP, Wilmington, DE for plaintiff.
for defendant: Catherine A. Gaul, Samuel M. Gross, Ashby & Geddes, Wilmington, DE; Bruce L. Silverstein, Malibu, CA for defendants.
Case Number: 2022-0261-PAF
Litigation demand not futile where directors who would give plaintiff a majority lacked any personal or professional connection to the interested controller sufficient to call the directors' independence into question.
Publication Date: 2024-04-08
Practice Area: Bankruptcy
Industry: Hospitality and Lodging | Legal Services | Real Estate
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Judge: Judge Rendell
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 23-1731
Bankruptcy court correctly rejected debtors' motion to modify their reorganization plan to obtain relief from a release of legal malpractice claims against their bankruptcy counsel where the motion was filed after debtors had substantially consummated the plan.
Publication Date: 2024-04-08
Practice Area: Corporate Entities
Industry: Automotive | E-Commerce | Investments and Investment Advisory
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Chancellor McCormick
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Christine M. Mackintosh, Rebecca A. Musarra, Grant & Eisenhofer, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Kimberly A. Evans, Robert Erikson, Irene R. Lax, Block & Leviton LLP, Wilmington, DE; Jason M. Leviton, Amanda R. Crawford, Block & Leviton LLP, Boston, MA; Ned Weinberger, Mark Richardson, Jiahui (Rose) Wang, Labaton Keller Sucharow LLP, Wilmington, DE; Domenico Minerva, John Vielandi, Labaton Keller Sucharow LLP, New York, NY for plaintiffs.
for defendant: Joseph R. Slights III, Brad D. Sorrels, Shannon E. German, Leah E. León, Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati, P.C., Wilmington, DE; 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: 2020-0415-KSJM
Court granted special litigation committee's motion to dismiss derivative action where members were sufficiently independent and disinterested and conducted a seven-month-long investigation that uncovered sufficient evidence to support the decision to move to dismiss.
Legal Speak is a weekly podcast that makes sense of what’s happening in the legal industry.
1 minute read