Don’t forget you can visit MyAlerts to manage your alerts at any time.
380 results for '* topic:"Contracts"' You can use Search Constraints to get even better search results
Publication Date: 2022-05-10
Practice Area: Contracts
Industry: Technology Media and Telecom
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Vice Chancellor Glasscock
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Michael W. McDermott, Peter C. McGivney, Berger Harris LLP, Wilmington, DE for plaintiffs.
for defendant: James D. Taylor, Jr., Saul Ewing Arnstein & Lehr LLP, Wilmington, DE; Joseph L. Manson III, Law Offices of Joseph L. Manson III, Alexandria, VA for defendants.
Case Number: D69807
The court found that director defendant named in a shareholder derivative suit was not entitled to indemnification for his defense costs because the settlement agreement he negotiated did not constitute success on the merits.
Publication Date: 2022-05-10
Practice Area: Contracts
Industry: Manufacturing | Software
Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
Judge: District Judge Fallon
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: D69811
In this memorandum opinion, the court found the arbitrator's award in favor of plaintiff to be supported by the evidence.
Publication Date: 2022-04-26
Practice Area: Contracts
Industry: Investments and Investment Advisory
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Vice Chancellor Glasscock
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Stephen B. Brauerman, Jason C. Jowers, Sarah T. Andrade, Justin C. Barrett, Bayard P.A. Wilmington, DE for plaintiffs.
for defendant: Rudolf Koch, Kyle Lachmund, Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Daniel Lynch, Lynch Thompson LLP, Chicago, IL for defendant.
Case Number: D69790
The court held that any harm incurred by plaintiffs by allowing the forum selection cause issue to be litigated in Illinois was of their own making such that plaintiffs should not be allowed to enjoin the Illinois action.
Publication Date: 2022-04-19
Practice Area: Contracts
Industry: Consulting
Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
Judge: District Judge Bibas
Attorneys: For plaintiff: David B. Anthony, Peter C. McGivney, Berger Harris, LLP, Wilmington, DE; Brian Hansen, Clayton O. Knowles, Adams and Reese LLP, Atlanta, GA for plaintiff.
for defendant: Robert A. Penza, Joseph C. Sharp, Stephen J. Kraftschik, Polsinelli PC, Wilmington, DE for defendant.
Case Number: D69788
The court held that plaintiff failed to state a claim for either fraud or breach of implied covenant.
Publication Date: 2022-03-29
Practice Area: Contracts
Industry: Construction | Insurance | State and Local Government
Court: Delaware Superior Court
Judge: Judge Davis
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Allison McCowan, Sarah Fruehauf, Zi-Xiang Shen, State of Delaware Department of Justice, Wilmington, DE; Timothy Jay Houseal, Jennifer M. Kinkus, Young, Conaway, Stargatt & Taylor LLP, Wilmington, DE for plaintiffs.
for defendant: Seth A. Niederman, Fox Rothschild LLP, Wilmington, DE; Michael J. Follet, Naulty, Scaricamazza & McDevitt, L.L.C., Wilmington, DE; Kenneth M. Doss, Casarino Christmas Shalk Ransom & Doss, P.A., Wilmington, DE, for defendants.
Case Number: D69763
Parties' manifested intent to be bound to contract form where use of the forms was contemplated by the project proposal and one party executed the contract forms at the explicit request of the other party.
Law Journal Press | Digital Book
Authors:
View this BookView more book results for the query "*"
Publication Date: 2022-03-15
Practice Area: Contracts
Industry: Technology Media and Telecom
Court: Delaware Supreme Court
Judge: Justice Traynor
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Stephen C. Norman, Jaclyn C. Levy, Potter Anderson & Corroon LLP, Wilmington, DE; Geoffrey P. Eaton, Matthew L. DiRisio, Winston & Strawn LLP, Washington, DC; Mitchell G. Stockwell, Joel D. Bush, II, Jeffrey H. Fisher, Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP, Atlanta, GA for appellant.
for defendant: A. Thompson Bayliss, Stephen C. Childs, Abrams & Bayliss LLP, Wilmington, DE; Hallie B. Levin, Peter G. Neiman, Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP, New York, NY; John J. Butts, Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP, Boston, MA for appellee.
Case Number: D69746
The court found that the lower court erred in its interpretation of a section of the settlement agreement between the parties, finding that the subject language was a Type II agreement that left open terms to be negotiated in the future.
Publication Date: 2022-03-01
Practice Area: Contracts
Industry: Investments and Investment Advisory
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Chancellor McCormick
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Thomas A. Uebler, Joseph L. Christensen, Kathleen A. Murphy, Mccollom D’Emilio Smith Uebler LLC, Wilmington, DE for plaintiff.
for defendant: Philip Trainer, Jr., Marie M. Degnan, Ashby & Geddes, Wilmington, DE for defendants.
Case Number: D69728
The court held that it had subject matter jurisdiction because the subject agreement was an instrument for the sale of stock, because it did not have discretion to decline jurisdiction, and because common law favored giving deference to plaintiff's choice of forum.
Publication Date: 2022-03-01
Practice Area: Contracts
Industry: Real Estate
Court: Delaware Superior Court
Judge: Judge Wharton
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Jeffrey A. Clouser, Wilmington, DE, pro se plaintiff.
for defendant: Judy M. Jones, Parkowski, Guerke & Swayze, P.A., Wilmington, DE for defendant.
Case Number: D69730
The court held that the factual allegations in the amended complaint did not support plaintiff's contention that the parties entered into an enforceable oral contract, that the realtor misrepresented herself, or that she interfered with plaintiff's business.
Publication Date: 2022-02-15
Practice Area: Contracts
Industry: Software | Technology Media and Telecom
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Vice Chancellor Slights
Attorneys: For plaintiff: William M. Lafferty, Kevin M. Coen, Sarah P. Kaboly, Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP, Wilmington, DE; Timothy W. Knapp, P.C., Howard M. Kaplan, Aleschia D. Hyde, Kirkland & Ellis LLP, Chicago, IL for plaintiffs/counterclaim defendants.
for defendant: Tammy L. Mercer, M. Paige Valeski, Young Conaway Stargatt & Taylor, LLP, Wilmington, DE; Evan C. Borges, Matthew S. Ingles, Greenberg Gross LLP, Costa Mesa, CA for defendants and counterclaim/third party plaintiffs.
Case Number: D69713
The court held that the non-disparagement clause contained in the restrictive covenant agreement between the parties was clearly a restrictive covenant.
Publication Date: 2022-02-08
Practice Area: Contracts
Industry: Consumer Products | Investments and Investment Advisory
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Vice Chancellor Slights
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Rudolf Koch, Matthew D. Perri, Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Greg Shinall, Michael G. Dickler, Sperling & Slater, P.C., Chicago, IL for plaintiffs.
for defendant: Robert S. Saunders, Sarah R. Martin, Michelle L. Davis, Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP, Wilmington, DE; Ryan D. Stottmann, Miranda N. Gilbert, Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP, Wilmington, DE; Tamir Young, Studin Young PC, Hauppauge, NY; Peter B. Ladig, Elizabeth A. Powers, Sarah T. Andrade, Bayard, P.A., Wilmington, DE for defendants.
Case Number: D69703
The court held that because there were two competing and reasonable interpretations of certain contract language, the contract was ambiguous, and the ambiguity barred a motion to dismiss as a matter of law or on the pleadings.
Legal Speak is a weekly podcast that makes sense of what’s happening in the legal industry.
1 minute read