Don’t forget you can visit MyAlerts to manage your alerts at any time.
184 results for '* judge:"Vice Chancellor Glasscock"' You can use Search Constraints to get even better search results
Publication Date: 2022-03-01
Practice Area: Mergers and Acquisitions
Industry: Investments and Investment Advisory | Technology Media and Telecom
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Vice Chancellor Glasscock
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Ned Weinberger,Mark Richardson, Labaton Sucharow LLP, Wilmington, DE; Jeroen van Kwawegen, Edward G. Timlin, Alla Zayenchik, Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann LLP, New York, NY; Vincent R. Cappucci, Joshua K. Porter, Entwistle& Cappucci LLP, New York, NY for plaintiffs.
for defendant: Rudolf Koch, Kevin M. Gallagher, Daniel E. Kaprow, Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Thomas Uebler, Mccollom D’Emilio Smith Uebler LLC, Wilmington, DE; Jason Cyrulnik, Paul Fattaruso, Evelyn Fruchter, Cyrulnik Fetters LLP, New York, NY; Kevin R. Shannon, Berton W. Ashman, Jr., Jacqueline A. Rogers, David A. Seal, Potter Anderson & Corroon LLP, Wilmington, DE, for defendants
Case Number: D69726
The court held that there were disputes over material facts regarding which entity was responsible for indemnifying a claim from a settlement with the Federal Communications Commission such that they precluded entry of summary judgment.
Publication Date: 2022-02-08
Practice Area: Mergers and Acquisitions
Industry: Energy | Investments and Investment Advisory
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Vice Chancellor Glasscock
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Blake A. Bennett, Cooch and Taylor, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Juan E. Monteverde, Monteverde & Associates PC, New York, NY for plaintiffs.
for defendant: Kenneth J. Nachbar, Alexandra M. Cumings, Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP, Wilmington, DE; Robert S. Harrell, Charles S. Kelley, Joseph De Simone, Michael Rayfield, Mayer Brown LLP, New York, NY for defendants.
Case Number: D69702
The court held that the business judgment rule applied to a merger that had been approved by a majority of stockholders.
Publication Date: 2022-01-11
Practice Area: Mergers and Acquisitions
Industry: Energy
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Vice Chancellor Glasscock
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Kenneth J. Nachbar, Susan W. Waesco, Matthew R. Clark, Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP, Wilmington, DE; Antony L. Ryan, Kevin J. Orsini, Michael P. Addis, David H. Korn, Cravath, Swaine & Moore LLP, New York, NY for plaintiff and counterclaim defendant.
for defendant: Rolin P. Bissel, James M. Yoch, Jr., Alberto E. Chávez, Young Conaway Stargatt & Taylor, LLP, Wilmington, DE; Michael C. Holmes, John C. Wander, Craig E. Zieminski, Andy E. Jackson, Vinson & Elkins LLP, Dallas, TX, for defendants and counterclaim plaintiffs.
Case Number: D69672
The court held that defendant was contractually obligated to reimburse plaintiff for a merger termination fee of $410 million plus interest to plaintiff.
Publication Date: 2021-12-28
Practice Area: Contractual Disputes
Industry: Distribution and Wholesale
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Vice Chancellor Glasscock
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Karen E. Keller, Jeffrey T. Castellano, Nathan R. Hoeschen, Shaw Keller LLP, Wilmington, DE for plaintiff.
for defendant: Kevin S. Mann, Cross & Simon LLC, Wilmington, DE; John J.E. Markham, II, Markham Read Zerner, LLC, Boston, MA for defendants.
Case Number: D69661
Court declined to exercise personal jurisdiction over officers of Delaware corporation where there were insufficient minimum contacts to further support the exercise of jurisdiction under constitutional due process norms.
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.
Law Journal Press | Digital Book
Authors:
View this BookView more book results for the query "*"
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.
Publication Date: 2021-11-23
Practice Area: Attorney Compensation
Industry: Investments and Investment Advisory | Legal Services | Technology Media and Telecom
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Vice Chancellor Glasscock
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Gregory V. Varallo, Andrew E. Blumberg, Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann LLP, Wilmington, DE; Michael Hanrahan, Kevin H. Davenport, Mary S. Thomas, Prickett, Jones & Elliott, P.A.; Mark Lebovitch, Jacqueline Y. Ma, Daniel E. Meyer, Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann LLP, New York, NY; Lee D. Rudy, Eric L. Zagar, Christopher M. Windover, Matthew C. Benedict, Kessler Topaz Meltzer & Check, LLP, Randor, PA; Robert D.Klausner, Klausner Kaufman Jensen & Levinson, P.A., Plantation, FL; Aaron T. Morris, Morris Kandinov LLP, Stowe, VT for plaintiffs.
for defendant: Robert S. Saunders, Joseph O. Larkin, Matthew P. Majarian, Ryan M. Lindsay, Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP, Wilmington, DE; Richard B. Harper, Thomas E. O’Brien, Vern Cassin, Baker Botts LLP, New York, NY; Kenneth J. Nachbar, Megan W. Cascio, Thomas P. Will, Sarah P. Kaboly, Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP, Wilmington, DE; Douglas D. Herrmann, Emily L. Wheatley, Troutman Pepper Hamilton Sanders LLP, Wilmington, DE for defendants.
Case Number: D69614
The court held that plaintiffs were entitled to a mootness fee in the amount of 9 million dollars.
Publication Date: 2021-11-16
Practice Area: Corporate Entities
Industry: Chemicals and Materials | Manufacturing
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Vice Chancellor Glasscock
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Gregory V. Varallo, Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann LLP, Wilmington, DE; Mark Lebovitch, Daniel E. Meyer, Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann LLP, New York, NY; Robert D. Klausner, Stuart A. Kaufman, Klausner Kaufman Jensen & Levinson, Plantation, FL; Gustavo F. Bruckner, Daryoush Behbood, Pomerantz LLP, New York, NY; Kip B. Shuman, Shuman, Glenn & Stecker, San Francisco, CA; Rusty E. Glenn, Shuman, Glenn & Stecker, Denver, CO; Brett D. Stecker, Shuman, Glenn & Stecker, Ardmore, PA for plaintiffs.
for defendant: Joel Friedlander, Jeffrey Gorris, Christopher Foulds, Friedlander & Gorris, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Jonathan M. Moses, Ryan A. McLeod, Justin L. Brooke, Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz, New York, NY for defendants.
Case Number: D69607
Plaintiffs failed to allege sufficient facts to support claim of demand futility because it could not show that officers and directors faced substantial liability for approving stock repurchases and dividend payments. Motion to dismiss granted.
Publication Date: 2021-10-27
Practice Area: Land Use and Planning
Industry: Real Estate | State and Local Government
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Vice Chancellor Glasscock
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Richard A. Forsten, Pamela J. Scott, Elizabeth S. Fenton, Saul Ewing Arnstein & Lehr LLP, Wilmington, DE for plaintiff.
for defendant: Max B. Walton, Lisa R. Hatfield, Connolly Gallagher LLP, Newark, DE for defendant.
Case Number: D69584
Plaintiff did not reasonably rely on previous city ordinances such that his rights did not become vested.
Publication Date: 2021-10-06
Practice Area: Contracts
Industry: Distribution and Wholesale | Manufacturing | Pharmaceuticals
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Vice Chancellor Glasscock
Attorneys: For plaintiff: A. Thompson Bayliss, Joseph A. Sparco, Abrams & Bayliss LLP, Wilmington, DE; Paul J. Loh, Jason H. Wilson, Eileen M. Ahern, Amelia L.B. Sargent, Kenneth M. Trujillo-Jamison, Willenken LLP, Los Angeles, CA for plaintiff.
for defendant: Kevin R. Shannon, Christopher N. Kelly, Daniel M. Rusk, IV, Potter Anderson & Corroon LLP, Wilmington, DE; Fred A. Kelly, Jr., Joshua S. Barlow, and Tiffany Jang, Haug Partners LLP, Boston, MA; David A. Zwally, Mark Basanta, Haug Partners LLP, New York, NY; Christopher Gosselin, Haug Partners LLP, Washington, DC for defendant.
Case Number: D69558
Pharmaceutical manufacturer breached supply agreement where its failure to maintain good manufacturing practices caused a shutdown of its production facility, leaving it unable to fulfill firm orders submitted by customer, which manufacturer was required to timely fill.
Legal Speak is a weekly podcast that makes sense of what’s happening in the legal industry.
1 minute read