• In Re Multiplan Corp. Stockholders' Litig.

    Publication Date: 2022-01-18
    Practice Area: Corporate Governance
    Industry: Investments and Investment Advisory
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Vice Chancellor Will
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Gregory V. Varallo, Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann LLP, Wilmington, DE; Mark Lebovitch, Daniel E. Meyer, Margaret Sanborn- Lowing, Joseph W. Caputo, Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann LLP, New York, NY for plaintiffs.
    for defendant: Raymond J. DiCamillo, Kevin M. Gallagher, Matthew D. Perri, Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Jonathan K. Youngwood, Rachel S. Sparks Bradley, Simpson Thacher & Bartlett LLP, New York, NY; Stephen P. Blake, Simpson Thacher & Bartlett LLP, Palo Alto, CA; Bradley R. Aronstam, S. Michael Sirkin, Ross Aronstam & Moritz LLP, Wilmington, DE; John A. Neuwirth, Joshua S. Amsel, Evert J. Christensen, Jr., Matthew S. Connors, Nicole E. Prunetti, Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP, New York, NY for defendants.

    Case Number: D69679

    The court found that plaintiff's claim was direct, not derivative, the claims were not exclusively contractual, and that the claims were not holder claims predicated on stockholder inaction.

  • Tygon Peak Capital Mgt., LLC v. Mobile Inv. Investco Co., LLC

    Publication Date: 2022-01-18
    Practice Area: Corporate Governance
    Industry: Investments and Investment Advisory
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Vice Chancellor Zurn
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Marc S. Casarino, Karine Sarkisian, Kelly Rowe, White and Williams LLP, Wilmington, DE; Jarrod D. Shaw and Keisha O. Coleman, McGuire Woods LLP, Pittsburgh, PA, for plaintiff.
    for defendant: Kevin M. Gallagher, Angela Lam, Christian C.F. Roberts, Richards, Layton, & Finger, P.A., Wilmington, DE for defendants.

    Case Number: D69681

    The court held that plaintiff venture capital firm failed to state claims against its investors for tort and quasi-contract claims.

  • In re Kraft Heinz Co.

    Publication Date: 2021-12-28
    Practice Area: Corporate Governance
    Industry: Food and Beverage | Investments and Investment Advisory
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Vice Chancellor Will
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Joel Friedlander, Jeffrey Gorris, Christopher M. Foulds, Friedlander & Gorris P.A., Wilmington, DE; P. Bradford deLeeuw, Deleeuw Law LLC, Wilmington, DE; David A. Jenkins, Robert K. Beste III, Smith, Katzenstein & Jenkins LLP, Wilmington, DE; Eduard Korsinsky, Gregory M. Nespole, Nicholas I. Porritt, Daniel Tepper, Levi & Korsinsky LLP, New York, NY; Jeffrey S. Abraham, Mitchell M. Z. Twersky, Atara Hirsch, Michael J. Klein, Abraham, Fruchter & Twersky, LLP, New York, NY; Lawrence P. Eagel, W. Scott Holleman, Melissa A. Fortunato, Marion C. Passmore, Bragar Eagel & Squire, P.C., New York, NY; Michael VanOverbeke, Vanoverbeke, Michaud & Timmony, P.C., Detroit, MI; Deborah Sturman, Sturman LLC, New York, NY for plaintiffs.
    for defendant: Michael A. Pittenger, Jacqueline A. Rogers, Caneel Radinson-Blasucci, Potter Anderson & Corroon LLP, Wilmington, DE; Sandra C. Goldstein, Stefan Atkinson, Kevin M. Neylan, Jr., Kirkland & Ellis LLP, New York, NY; Matthew D. Stachel, Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP, Wilmington, DE; Daniel J. Kramer, Andrew J. Ehrlich, William A. Clareman, Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP, New York, NY for defendants.

    Case Number: D69657

    The court held that plaintiffs failed to plead sufficient allegations that a majority of the demand board was interested in a stock sale transaction such that demand would be excused.

  • In re Woodbridge Group of Co., LLC

    Publication Date: 2021-12-28
    Practice Area: Bankruptcy
    Industry: Investments and Investment Advisory
    Court: U.S. Bankruptcy Court
    Judge: Judge Stickles
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:

    Case Number: D69654

    The court held that, in this adversary proceeding, the trustee's delay in moving to amend its complaint was not undue; if the amendment was allowed, the defendant would not suffer prejudice, the motion was not brought in bad faith, and the amend-ment would relate back to the original complaint for purposes of the applicable statute of limitations.

  • Lima USA, Inc. v. Mahfouz

    Publication Date: 2021-12-21
    Practice Area: Contractual Disputes
    Industry: Health Care | Investments and Investment Advisory | Technology Media and Telecom
    Court: Delaware Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Wallace
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: David E. Wilks, Scott B. Czerwonka, Wilks Law, LLC, Wilmington, DE; Jordan E. Stern, William H. Newman, Becker, Glynn, Muffly, Chassin & Hosinski, LLP, New York, NY for plaintiff.
    for defendant: Catherine A. Gaul, Ashby & Geddes, Wilmington, DE; David B. Anthony, Berger Harris LLP, Wilmington, DE; Beth A. Bryan, Taft Stettinius & Hollister, LLP, Cincinnati, OH for defendants.

    Case Number: D69649

    The court held that plaintiff's claims were not ripe or justiciable and its breach of representations claim failed to state a claim where plaintiff did not and could not plead damages.

  • Law Journal Press | Digital Book

    Allegheny County and Westmoreland County Court Rules 2024

    Authors:

    View this Book

    View more book results for the query "*"

  • Trumbull Radiologists, Inc. v. Premier Imaging TRI Holdings LLC

    Publication Date: 2021-12-14
    Practice Area: Contracts
    Industry: Health Care | Investments and Investment Advisory
    Court: Delaware Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Johnston
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Dominick T. Gattuso, Aaron M. Nelson, Heyman Enerio Gattuso & Hirzel LLP, Wilmington, DE; Anthony J. O’Malley, Rajeev K. Adlakha, Karey E. Werner, Vorys, Sater, Seymour and Pease LLP, Cleveland, OH for plaintiffs
    for defendant: D. McKinley Measley, Sabrina M. Hendershot, Michael J. Slobom, Jr., Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP, Wilmington, DE; Britt K. Latham, Bass Berry & Sims PLC, Nashville, TN; Shayne R. Clinton, Bass Berry & Sims PLC, Knoxville, TN for defendants

    Case Number: D69642

    The court held that plaintiffs properly pled claims of both breach of contract and breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing; at the pleadings stage, plaintiffs were allowed to maintain both claims. Motion to dismiss denied.

  • Equity-League Pension Trust Fund v. Great Hill Partners L.P.

    Publication Date: 2021-12-14
    Practice Area: Corporate Governance
    Industry: E-Commerce | Investments and Investment Advisory
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Vice Chancellor Glasscock
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Corinne Elise Amato, Kevin H. Davenport, Jason W. Rigby, Prickett, Jones & Elliott, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Eric L. Zagar, Matthew C. Benedict, Kessler Topaz Meltzer & Check, LLP, Radnor, PA; Patrick C. Lynch, Lynch & Pine, Providence, RI, for plaintiff.
    for defendant: Paul J. Lockwood, Jenness E. Parker, Jacob J. Fedechko, Trevor T. Nielsen, Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom, Wilmington, DE; John L. Reed, Ronald N. Brown, III, Peter H. Kyle, Kelly L. Fruend, DLA Piper LLP (US), Wilmington, DE; Rudolf Koch, Matthew D. Perri, Andrew L. Milam, Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Roberto M. Braceras, Caroline H. Bullerjahn, John A. Barker, Dylan E. Schweers, Goodwin Procter LLP, Boston, MA; Kurt M. Heyman, Gillian L. Andrews, Heyman Enerio Gattuso & Hir-zel, LLP, Wilmington, DE; Brandon F. White, Euripides Dalmanieras, Leah S. Rizkallah, Foley Hoag LLP, Boston, MA for defendants.

    Case Number: D69638

    The court held in this derivative suit that demand was not excused where there was no showing that at least five members of a nine-member board of directors were unable to consider a pre-suit demand. Motions to dismiss granted.

  • In Re Vaxart Inc. Stockholder Litig.

    Publication Date: 2021-12-14
    Practice Area: Corporate Governance
    Industry: Biotechnology | Investments and Investment Advisory
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Vice Chancellor Fioravanti
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Stephen E. Jenkins, F. Troupe Mickler, IV, Ashby & Geddes, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Gregory V. Varallo, Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann LLP, Wilmington, DE; Jeroen van Kwawegen, Daniel E. Meyer, Margaret Sanborn-Lowing, Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann LLP, New York, NY; Gustavo F. Bruckner, Samuel J.Adams, Daryoush Behbood, Pomerantz LLP, New York, NY; Sascha N. Rand, Rollo C. Baker, IV , Silpa Maruri, Jesse Bernstein, Charles H. Sangree, Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP, New York, NY; Stanley D. Bernstein, Matthew Guarnero, Bernstein Liebhard LLP, New York, NY; William J. Fields, Christopher J. Kupka, Samir Shukurov, Fields Kupka & Shukurov LLP, New York, NY for plaintiffs.
    for defendant: Brock E. Czeschin, Andrew L. Milam, Richards Layton & Finger, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Riccardo DeBari, Renee Zaytsev, Mendy Pie-karski, Thompson Hine, New York, NY; Matthew F. Davis, Abraham C. Schneider, Potter Anderson & Corroon LLP, Wilmington, DE; Douglas A. Rappaport, Kaitlin D. Shapiro, Elizabeth C. Rosen, Madeleine R. Freeman, Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP, New York, NY for defendants.

    Case Number: D69639

    The court held that plaintiff shareholders were required to make a demand on the board prior to filing suit. Because they did not make a demand, their claims failed. Motion to dismiss granted.

  • Knott Partners L.P. v. Telepathy Labs, Inc.

    Publication Date: 2021-12-07
    Practice Area: Corporate Governance
    Industry: E-Commerce | Investments and Investment Advisory | Technology Media and Telecom
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Vice Chancellor Glasscock
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Neal C. Belgam, Jason Z. Miller, Michael C. Wagner, Smith, Katzenstein & Jenkins LLP, Wilmington, DE; Christopher M. Caparelli, Torys LLP, New York, NY for plaintiff.
    for defendant: Thomas G. Macauley, Macauley LLC, Wilmington, DE; Euripides D. Dalmanieras, Foley Hoag LLP, Boston, MA for defendant.

    Case Number: D69631

    Where a corporation failed to update its stock ledger after acknowledging a convertible note holder's conversion into preferred stock, court could look to extrinsic evidence beyond the ledger to determine standing for a §220 demand.

  • Bandera Master Fund, LP v. Boardwalk Pipeline Partners, LP

    Publication Date: 2021-11-30
    Practice Area: Contracts
    Industry: Energy | Investments and Investment Advisory
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Vice Chancellor Laster
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: A. Thompson Bayliss, J. Peter Shindel, Jr., Daniel G. Paterno, Eric A. Veres, Samuel D. Cordle, Abrams & Bayliss LLP, Wilmington, DE for plaintiffs.
    for defendant: Srinivas M. Raju, Blake Rohrbacher, Matthew D. Perri, John M. O’Toole, Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Rolin P. Bissell, Young Conaway Stargatt & Taylor LLP, Wilmington, DE; Daniel A. Mason, Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP, Wilmington, DE; Stephen P. Lamb, Andrew G. Gordon, Harris Fischman, Robert N. Kravitz, Carter E. Greenbaum, Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP, New York, NY; Lawrence Portnoy, Charles S. Duggan, Gina Cora, Davis Polk & Wardwell LLP, New York, NY, for defendants.

    Case Number: D69622

    The court held that the General Partner breached the partnership agreement by exercising the call right without first satisfy-ing the Opinion Condition or the Acceptability Condition.