Don’t forget you can visit MyAlerts to manage your alerts at any time.
182 results for '* judge:"Vice Chancellor Glasscock"' You can use Search Constraints to get even better search results
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.
Publication Date: 2023-12-18
Practice Area: Business Torts
Industry: Biotechnology | Investments and Investment Advisory
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Vice Chancellor Glasscock
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Stephen C. Norman, David A. Seal, Callan R. Jackson, Charles R. Hallinan, Potter Anderson, Wilmington, DE; Eric Landau, Travis Biffar, Ellenoff Grossman & Schole LLP, Irvine, CA for plaintiff.
for defendant: Andrew L. Cole, Jack M. Dougherty, Cole Schotz P.C., Wilmington, DE; Alan D. Albert, O’Hagan Meyer, PLLC, Wilmington, DE for defendants.
Case Number: 2022-1132-SG
Fraud claims brought by corporation against its former controller failed since the controller's knowledge of the alleged fraud would be imputed to the corporation and thus the claim effectively alleged that the controller defrauded himself.
Publication Date: 2023-12-04
Practice Area: Corporate Governance
Industry: Investments and Investment Advisory | Pharmaceuticals
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Vice Chancellor Glasscock
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Gregory V. Varallo, Glenn R. McGillivray, Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann LLP, Wilmington, DE; Ned Weinberger, Mark D. Richardson, Labaton Sucharow LLP, Wilmington, DE; Christine M. Mackintosh, Rebecca A. Musarra, Grant & Eisenhofer P.A., Wilmington, DE; Christopher J. Orrico, Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann LLP, New York, NY; Frank Schirripa, Hach Rose Schirripa & Cheverie LLP, New York, NY; Nathaniel L. Orenstein, Steven L. Groopman, Berman Tabacco, Boston, MA for plaintiffs.
for defendant: William M. Lafferty, D. McKinley Measley, Thomas P. Will, Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP, Wilmington, DE; F. Joseph Warin, Jonathan M. Phillips, Courtney M. Brown, Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP, Washington, DC for defendant.
Case Number: 2019-0816-SG
Court dismissed derivative complaint where single-member special litigation committee conducted adequate review of the worthiness of the litigation and its conclusions were sufficiently supported by evidence, and there was an insufficient basis to question the single member's independence from other board members potentially facing liability.
Publication Date: 2023-11-13
Practice Area: Damages
Industry: Financial Services and Banking | Investments and Investment Advisory
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Vice Chancellor Glasscock
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Stephen C. Norman, Aaron R. Sims, Potter Anderson & Corroon LLP, Wilmington, DE; David G. Januszewski, Sheila C. Ramesh, Cahill Gordon & Reindel LLP, New York, NY for plaintiff.
for defendant: Edwin J. Harron, James M. Yoch, Jr., Kevin P. Rickert, Young Conaway Stargatt & Taylor, LLP, Wilmington, DE; Kevin C. Maclay, Todd E. Phillips, Quincy M. Crawford, Nathaniel R. Miller, Caplin & Drysdale, Chartered, Washington, D.C.; William M. Kelleher, Neil R. Lapinski, Phillip A. Giordano, Gordon, Fournaris & Mammarella, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Ira S. Zaroff, Richard M. Zaroff, Zaroff & Zaroff LLP, Garden City, NY; P. Clarkson Collins, Jr., K. Tyler O’Connell, Albert J. Carroll, R. Eric Hacker, Morris James LLP, Wilmington, DE for defendants.
Case Number: 2017-0822-SG
Court dismissed in rem action over limited partnership interest where hearing the action would require the court to hale in defendants it lacked personal jurisdiction over and the proceedings were an attempt to circumvent the dismissal of plaintiff's fraudulent transfer claim against defendants for lack of jurisdiction.
Publication Date: 2023-11-06
Practice Area: Contractual Disputes
Industry: Mining and Resources
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Vice Chancellor Glasscock
Attorneys: For plaintiff: David A. Felice, Bailey & Glasser, LLP, Wilmington, DE; Andrew St. Laurent, Harris St. Laurent & Wechsler LLP, New York, NY for plaintiffs.
for defendant: John M. Seaman, E. Wade Houston, Abrams & Bayliss LLP, Wilmington, DE; Chelsea Corey, King & Spalding LLP, Charlotte, NC; Carl D. Neff, FisherBroyles, LLP, Wilmington, DE; Aurora Cassirer, Christina H. Bost Seaton, FisherBroyles, LLP, New York, NY; Karen E. Keller, Andrew E. Russell, Nathan R. Hoeschen, Shaw Keller LLP, Wilmington, DE; Justin L. Ormand, Allen & Overy, New York, NY; Patrick W. Pearsall, Allen & Overy, Washington, D.C. for defendants.
Case Number: 2022-0665-SG
Plaintiffs were former equity holders in an Australian rare-earth mining company, whose primary asset was interest in a mining project in West Texas. Defendants transferred the company's assets to a new Delaware entity. Plaintiffs' fourteen causes of action alleged that defendants promised that plaintiffs would each receive an equivalent amount of equity in the Delaware entity as each had previously held in the mining company, however, they alleged that the transactions had diminished their ownership interests. Defendants' motions to
Law Journal Press | Digital Book
Authors: Michael R. Griffinger, Paul F. Cullum III
View this BookView more book results for the query "*"
Publication Date: 2023-10-16
Practice Area: Corporate Governance
Industry: 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, Eric J. Riedel, Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann LLP, New York, NY for plaintiff.
for defendant: Rudolf Koch, Kevin M. Gallagher, Daniel E. Kaprow, John M. O’Toole, Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Thomas Uebler, McCollom D’Emilio Smith Uebler LLC, Wilmington, DE; Jason Cyrulnik, Paul Fattaruso, Matthew Henken, Cyrulnik Fattaruso LLP, New York, NY for defendants.
Case Number: 2017-0486-SG
Although controlling stockholder breached fiduciary duties by using his position to cause company to release an indemnification claim, the minority stockholders were only entitled to nominal damages due to significant obstacles to enforcing the claim which resulted in the release consideration being worth more than the company likely would have recovered attempting to enforce the claim.
Publication Date: 2023-09-18
Practice Area: Contracts
Industry: Pharmaceuticals
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Vice Chancellor Glasscock
Attorneys: For plaintiff: A. Thompson Bayliss, Eric A. Veres, Joseph A. Sparco, Abrams & Bayliss LLP, Wilmington, DE; Paul J. Loh, Jason H. Wilson, Eileen M. Ahern, Amelia L.B. Sargent, Peter Shimamoto, Ashley L. Kirk, Kenneth M. Trujillo-Jamison, Breeanna N. Brewer, Caitlin F. Lynch, 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, Tiffany Jang, Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer LLP, Washington, D.C.; Mark Basanta, Aakruti G. Vakharia, Haug Partners LLP, New York, NY; Christopher Gosselin, Haug Partners LLP, Washington, D.C. for defendant.
Case Number: 2020-0953-SG
Plaintiff's damages methodology was found mostly reliable, as the court rejected defendant's assertion that plaintiff could have mitigated its damages since the evidence showed that defendant would not have cooperated with those mitigation efforts or the success of those efforts was speculative at best.
Publication Date: 2023-09-04
Practice Area: Contracts
Industry: Health Care
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Vice Chancellor Glasscock
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Michael A. Barlow, Adam K. Schulman, Abrams & Bayliss LLP, Wilmington, DE; Anthony Bongiorno, Jessica Reese, Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP, Boston, MA; Rollo C. Baker IV, Eric White, Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP, New York, NY for plaintiffs.
for defendant: Lewis H. Lazarus, K. Tyler O’Connell, Albert J. Carroll, Barnaby Grzaslewicz, Morris James LLP, Wilmington, DE; Timothy W. Knapp, Brendan E. Ryan, Kent J. Hayden, Kirkland & Ellis LLP, Chicago, IL for defendants.
Case Number: 2022-0289-SG
Finding that that the asset purchase agreement executed by the parties had created a scheme for prorating Medicaid reimbursement distribution payments relating to the year in which closing on the hospitals occurred consistent with defendants' construction of the agreement, the court granted partial summary judgment to defendants.
Publication Date: 2023-08-07
Practice Area: Mergers and Acquisitions
Industry: Health Care | Investments and Investment Advisory | Recruitment and Staffing
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Vice Chancellor Glasscock
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Kenneth J. Nachbar, Alexandra M. Cumings, Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP, Wilmington, DE; Andrew Z. Schwartz, Euripides Dalmanieras, Christian A. Garcia, Foley Hoag LLP, Boston, MA for plaintiffs.
for defendant: Rudolf Koch, Travis S. Hunter, and Sara M. Metzler, Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Motty Shulman, Centricity Law PLLC, New York, NY; Robin A. Henry, Fried, Frank, Harris, Shriver & Jacobson LLP, New York, NY for defendants.
Case Number: 2022-1113-SG
Although arbitral panel did not expressly address claims against one defendant in its award imposing joint and several liability against all defendants, that oversight did not rise to the level of significant error necessary to overturn an arbitration award where those theories of liability against the defendant were pled by claimants and thus before the panel for its consideration.
Publication Date: 2023-07-31
Practice Area: Corporate Governance
Industry: Investments and Investment Advisory | Technology Media and Telecom
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Vice Chancellor Glasscock
Attorneys: For plaintiff: F. Troupe Mickler IV, Stephen E. Jenkins, Ashby & Geddes, P.A., Wilmington, DE; William J. Fields, Christopher J. Kupka, Samir Shukurov, Fields Kupka & Shukurov LLP, New York, NY; Gustavo F. Bruckner, Samuel J. Adams, Daryoush Behbood, Pomerantz LLP, New York, NY; Brian Schall, The Schall Law Firm, Los Angeles, CA for plaintiffs.
for defendant: Kevin R. Shannon, Tyler J. Leavengood, Jaclyn C. Levy, Michael C. Gorski, Jr., Lucille E. Wiesner, Potter Anderson & Corroon LLP, Wilmington, DE; Richard B. Harper, Vern Cassin, Thomas E. O’Brien, Alyssa M. Pronley, Kristina Wenner, Baker Botts LLP, New York, NY; Bradley R. Aronstam, S. Reiko Rogozen, Roger S. Stronach, Ross Aronstam & Moritz LLP, Wilmington, DE; Joseph O. Larkin, Matthew P. Majarian, Rupal K. Joshi, Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP, Wilmington, DE; James R. Carroll, Skadden, Arps, Meagher & Flom LLP, Boston, MA for defendants.
Case Number: 2021-1116-SG
The court denied defendants' motion to dismiss plaintiffs' derivative complaint which alleged that one defendant had made a sham offer to purchase another defendant's high vote stock to trigger a call right, which in turn resulted in significant monetary benefits to both defendants and harm to nominal defendant.
Legal Speak is a weekly podcast that makes sense of what’s happening in the legal industry.
1 minute read