Filter This View

  • White Winston Select Asset Funds, LLC v. Good Times Rest., Inc.

    Publication Date: 2024-03-18
    Practice Area: Mergers and Acquisitions
    Industry: Food and Beverage | Hospitality and Lodging | Investments and Investment Advisory
    Court: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
    Judge: Judge Restrepo
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 23-1297

    Seller did not breach implied covenant of good faith in negotiations simply by increasing its asking price, as non-binding letter of intent allowed parties to terminate negotiations except to breach exclusivity provision.

  • Urvan v. AMMO, Inc.

    Publication Date: 2024-03-11
    Practice Area: Mergers and Acquisitions
    Industry: Investments and Investment Advisory | Manufacturing | Retail
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Judge Wallace
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Kevin M. Coen, Rachel R. Tunney, Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnel LLP, Wilmington, DE; Nicholas Cutaia, Jaclyn Grodin, Goulston & Storrs PC, New York, NY; Joshua M. Looney, Nora A. Saunders, Goulston & Storrs PC, Boston, MA for plaintiff.
    for defendant: A. Thompson Bayliss, Peter C. Cirka, Abrams & Bayliss LLP, Wilmington, DE for defendants.
    Case Number: 2023-0470 PRW

    Although claimant had potentially known about facts underlying fraud/misrepresentation claims for some time, the court declined to apply laches to bar the claims where they were filed within the analogous statutes of limitations. Plaintiff's motion to dismiss denied; defendants' motion to dismiss granted in part and denied in part.

  • Stein v. Blankfein

    Publication Date: 2024-03-11
    Practice Area: Corporate Governance
    Industry: Investments and Investment Advisory
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Vice Chancellor Glasscock
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Brian E. Farnan, Michael J. Farnan, Rosemary J. Piergiovanni, Farnan LLP, Wilmington, DE; A. Arnold Gershon, Michael A. Toomey, Barrack, Rodos & Bacine, New York, NY for plaintiff.
    for defendant: Kevin M. Gallagher, Robert L. Burns, Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A. Wilmington, DE; Kevin G. Abrams, Peter Shindel Jr., Matthew L. Miller, Abrams & Bayliss LLP, Wilmington, DE; Robert J. Giuffra, Jr., David M.J. Rein, Sullivan & Cromwell LLP, New York, NY for defendants.
    Case Number: 2017-0354-SG

    Law of the case precluded settlement objector's challenge to the adequacy of consideration where revised settlement merely deleted provisions improperly releasing future claims and the court had previously found the retained provisions fair and beneficial to the corporation and its stockholders.

  • Murdick Capital Mgmt. L.P. v. QuarterNorth Energy Inc.

    Publication Date: 2024-03-11
    Practice Area: Mergers and Acquisitions
    Industry: Energy | Investments and Investment Advisory
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Vice Chancellor Will
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Bradley R. Aronstam, Roger S. Stronach, Benjamin M. Whitney, Ross Aronstam & Moritz LLP, Wilmington, DE; Jordan A. Goldstein, Lauren J. Zimmerman, Babak Ghafarzade, Selendy Gay PLLC, New York, NY for plaintiffs.
    for defendant: Blake Rohrbacher, Matthew W. Murphy, John M. O’Toole, Edmond S. Kim, Spencer V. Crawford, Margaret Rockey, Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Harry P. Susman, Susman Godfrey L.L.P., Houston, TX; Thomas W. Briggs, Jr., Kirk Andersen, Morris Nichols Arsht & Tunnell LLP, Wilmington, DE; Andrew K. Glenn, Glenn Agre Bergman & Fuentes LLP, New York, NY for defendants.
    Case Number: 2024-0106-LWW

    Court declined to preliminarily enjoin invocation of drag-along rights where the invocation was not inconsistent with the terms of the proposed merger agreement or the minority securityholders' agreements and the minority could obtain monetary relief if the court ultimately found an improper invocation.

  • Malkani v. Cunningham

    Publication Date: 2024-03-11
    Practice Area: Securities Litigation
    Industry: Health Care | Investments and Investment Advisory | Technology Media and Telecom
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Vice Chancellor Glasscock
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Philip Trainer, Jr., Marie M. Degnan, Randall J. Teti, Ashby & Geddes, Wilmington, DE; Marcos D. Jimenez, Marcos D. Jimenez, P.A., Miami, FL for plaintiffs.
    for defendant: Ryan P. Newell, Lakshmi A. Muthu, Tara C. Pakrouh, Michael A. Carbonara, Jr., Young Conaway Stargatt & Taylor, LLP, Wilmington, DE; Michael C. Heyden, Jr., Joseph E. Brenner, Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani, LLP, Wilmington, DE for defendants.
    Case Number: 2020-1004-SG

    Although defendant prevailed on some claims asserted by plaintiff, plaintiff was the prevailing party in the overall litigation as the central issue in the case was the validity and enforceability of the parties' contracts, and thus plaintiff was entitled to legal fees and costs under the contractual fee-shifting provisions.

  • Law Journal Press | Digital Book

    New Jersey Estate Litigation 2014

    Authors: Michael R. Griffinger, Paul F. Cullum III

    View this Book

    View more book results for the query "*"

  • W. Palm Beach Firefighters' Pension Fund v. Moelis & Co.

    Publication Date: 2024-02-26
    Practice Area: Corporate Governance
    Industry: Financial Services and Banking | Investments and Investment Advisory
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Vice Chancellor Laster
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Thomas Curry, Taylor D. Bolton, Saxena White P.A, Wilmington, DE; David Wales, Saxena White P.A., White Plains, NY; Adam Warden, Saxena White P.A; Boca Raton, FL for plaintiff.
    for defendant: John P. DiTomo, Miranda N. Gilbert, Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP, Wilmington, DE; William Savitt, Anitha Reddy, Getzel Berger, Emma S. Stein, Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz, New York, NY for defendant.
    Case Number: 2023-0309-JTL

    Court denied summary judgment dismissal of complaint challenging legality of stockholders' agreement provisions on grounds of laches and ripeness, where equitable defenses could not validate a void contractual provision and where stockholder could launch a facial attack against challenged provisions without having to wait for company controllers to breach fiduciary duties.

  • Jaroslawicz v. M&T Bank Corp.

    Publication Date: 2024-02-19
    Practice Area: Securities Litigation
    Industry: Financial Services and Banking | Investments and Investment Advisory
    Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
    Judge: District Judge Wallach
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Francis J. Murphy, Jr., Jonathan L. Parshall, Murphy, Spadaro & Landon, Wilmington, DE; Steven M. Coren, Benjamin M. Mather, Matthew R. Williams, Kauffman, Coren & Ress, P.C, Philadelphia, PA for plaintiffs.
    for defendant: Brian M. Rostocki, Anne M. Steadman, Justin M. Forcier, Reed Smith LLP, Wilmington, DE; Jonathan K. Youngwood, Janet A. Gochman, Tyler A. Anger, Katherine A. Hardiman, Simpson, Thacher & Bartlett, New York, NY; Kevin R. Shannon, Daniel Rusk, Potter Anderson & Corroon LLP, Wilmington, DE; Tracy Richelle High, Scott A. Foltz, Sullivan & Cromwell LLP, New York, NY for defendants.
    Case Number: 15-00897-EJW

    Although plaintiffs' experts' report in support of their damages theory for class certification used sufficiently reliable methodologies under the Daubert standard, the evidence was wholly speculative to demonstrate economic loss or proximate causation, such that plaintiffs could not meet the commonality or predominance standards.

  • Friddle v. Moehle

    Publication Date: 2024-02-19
    Practice Area: Corporate Governance
    Industry: Investments and Investment Advisory
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Vice Chancellor Glasscock
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Thad J. Bracegirdle, Emily L. Skaug, Bayard, P.A., Wilmington, Delaware; Brian A. Katz, John G. Moon, Olshan Frome Wolosky LLP, New York, NY for plaintiffs.
    for defendant: Steve L. Caponi, Matthew B. Goeller, K&L Gates LLP, Wilmington, DE; Christopher M. Verdini, K&L Gates LLP, Pittsburgh, PA for defendants.
    Case Number: 2021-0306-SG

    Court interpreted the scope of the parties' joint waiver of their contractual mandatory arbitration provision to include only those claims the parties had asserted in their pleadings at the time they executed the waiver, so as to avoid an unintended waiver of bargained-for rights.

  • Mercury Partners Mgmt., LLC v. Valo Health, Inc.

    Publication Date: 2024-02-19
    Practice Area: Mergers and Acquisitions
    Industry: Health Care | Investments and Investment Advisory | Technology Media and Telecom
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Vice Chancellor Zurn
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Brian E. Farnan, Farnan LLP, Wilmington, DE for plaintiff.
    for defendant: Rudolf Koch, Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A., Wilmington, DE for defendant.
    Case Number: 2023-0318-MTZ

    Court declined interlocutory review where appeal did not raise novel or conflicting issues of law regarding decision to decline specific performance on a best efforts clause.

  • Larian v. Momentus Inc.

    Publication Date: 2024-02-12
    Practice Area: Contracts
    Industry: Aerospace | Investments and Investment Advisory | Manufacturing
    Court: Delaware Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Davis
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Dominick T. Gattuso, Elizabeth A. DeFelice, Gillian L. Andrews, Heyman Enerio Gattuso & Hirzel LLP, Wilmington, DE; Jonathan K. Cooperman, Kelly Drye & Warren LLP, New York, NY for plaintiff.
    for defendant: Joseph L. Christensen, Christensen & Dougherty LLP, Wilmington, DE; Perrie M. Weiner, Baker & McKenzie, LLP, Los Angeles, CA; Peter P. Tomczak, Michael D. Lehrman, Baker & McKenzie LLP, Chicago, IL for defendant.
    Case Number: N22C-07-133 EMD CCLD

    Court declined to resolve breach of contract claim on summary judgment where parties had material factual disputes over the contractual conditions precedent to payment.