• Snyder v. DowDuPont, Inc.

    Publication Date: 2022-05-24
    Practice Area: Labor Law
    Industry: Manufacturing
    Court: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
    Judge: Judge Bibas
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:

    Case Number: D69828

    Family and Medical Leave Act retaliation claims failed where employee could not show that employer's decision to surveil employee on medical leave due to reports giving rise to suspicion of abuse of leave, or to terminate employee after surveillance provided evidence of such abuse, was mere pretext for retaliation.

  • Micro Focus (US), Inc. v. Ins. Serv. Office, Inc.

    Publication Date: 2022-05-24
    Practice Area: Contracts
    Industry: Insurance | Software
    Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
    Judge: District Judge Andrews
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: J. Clayton Athey, Prickett, Jones & Elliott, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Hugh J. Marbury, Kaan Ekiner, Ryan P. Bottegal, Cozen O’Connor, Washington, DC; Stuart M.G. Seraina, BaldwinLaw LLC, Baltimore, MD for plaintiffs.
    for defendant: Brian R. Lemon, McCarter & English, LLP, Wilmington, DE; Scott S. Christie, McCarter & English, LLP, Newark, NJ for defendant.

    Case Number: D69827

    Although one defendant lacked standing to assert breach of contract claims where it was not a party or intended third-party beneficiary of the contract as it did not exist at the time of contract formation, the district court could exercise its discretion to retain supplemental jurisdiction over remaining state law claims after having dismissed all federal claims.

  • In the Matter of Global Safety Labs, Inc.

    Publication Date: 2022-05-24
    Practice Area: Corporate Entities
    Industry:
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Vice Chancellor Laster
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Marc S. Casarino, Karine Sarkisian, Kennedys CMK LLP, Wilmington, DE for petitioner.
    for defendant: N/A

    Case Number: D69823

    Due to the lack of sufficient information in a §280 petition to determine obligations to post security, a winding-up company was directed to file a document similar to a bankruptcy "first-day declaration."

  • Kaur v. Boston Scientific Corp.

    Publication Date: 2022-05-24
    Practice Area: Products Liability
    Industry: Health Care | Manufacturing
    Court: Delaware Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Jones
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Robert J. Leoni, Shelby & Leoni, Wilmington, DE for plaintiffs.
    for defendant: Colleen D. Shields, Eckert, Seamans, Cherin & Mellott LLC, Wilmington, DE for defendant.

    Case Number: D69829

    Court excluded expert testimony to the extent it opined about corporate defendant's state of mind or the reasonableness of its actions or attempted to offer a legal conclusion, since such testimony would usurp the fact-finding province of the jury.

  • Greentech Consultancy Co., WLL v. Hilco IP Servs., LLC

    Publication Date: 2022-05-24
    Practice Area: Contracts
    Industry: Consulting
    Court: Delaware Superior Court
    Judge: Judge LeGrow
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Theodore A. Kittila, William E. Green, Jr., Halloran Farkas & Kittila LLP, Wilmington, DEs for plaintiff
    for defendant: Richard L. Renck, Duane Morris LLP, Wilmington, DE for defendant.

    Case Number: D69825

    Implied contractual obligation in preliminary agreement to negotiate a final agreement in good faith was an enforceable contractual obligation, but summary judgment was inappropriate where there was a genuine issue of material fact as to whether defendant acted in bad faith during the negotiations.

  • Law Journal Press | Digital Book

    Library of Pennsylvania Family Law Forms, Fourth Edition

    Authors: Joseph S. Britton

    View this Book

    View more book results for the query "*"

  • ADGS, LLC v. Emery Silfurtun, Inc.

    Publication Date: 2022-05-24
    Practice Area: Contracts
    Industry: Manufacturing
    Court: Delaware Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Davis
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Christian J. Singewald, Kelly E. Rowe, White and Williams LLP, Wilmington, DE for plaintiff.
    for defendant: Blake Rohrbacher, Kelly E. Farnan, Valerie A. Caras, Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A., Wilmington, DE for defendants.

    Case Number: D69824

    Claims dismissed for lack of personal jurisdiction where no act or injury took place in Delaware, such that the court could not exercise jurisdiction over foreign entities under either a conduct-based or successor liability theory.

  • Coster v. UIP Co., Inc.

    Publication Date: 2022-05-17
    Practice Area: Corporate Entities
    Industry: Investments and Investment Advisory | Real Estate
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Vice Chancellor McCormick
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Max B. Walton, Kyle Evans Gay, Connolly Gallagher LLP, Newark, DE; Michael K. Ross, Thomas Shakow, Serine Consolino, Aegis Law Group LLP, Washington, DC for plaintiff.
    for defendant: Stephen B. Brauerman, Elizabeth A. Powers, Bayard, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Deborah B. Baum, Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP, Washington, DC; Neal C. Belgam, Kelly A. Green, Jason Z. Miller, Smith Katzenstein & Jenkins LLP, Wilmington, DE for defendants.

    Case Number: D69814

    Board was substantially justified in approving stock sale that diluted equal stockholder's interest, where it mooted that stockholder's legal action that posed a risk of triggering termination of the company's key contracts.

  • Sciabacuccchi v. Liberty Broadband Corp.

    Publication Date: 2022-05-17
    Practice Area: Mergers and Acquisitions
    Industry: Technology Media and Telecom
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Vice Chancellor Glasscock
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Nathan A. Cook, Block & Leviton LLP, Wilmington, DE; Kurt M. Heyman, Aaron M. Nelson, Melissa N. Donimirski, Heyman Enerio Gattuso & Hirzel LLP, Wilmington, DE; Jason M. Leviton, Joel A. Fleming, Lauren G. Milgroom, Block & Leviton LLP, Boston, MA; Gregory V. Varallo, Andrew E. Blumberg, Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann LLP, Wilmington, DE; Alla Zayenchik, Thomas James, Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann LLP, New York, NY for plaintiffs.
    for defendant: David C. McBride, Martin S. Lessner, James M. Yoch, Jr., Paul J. Loughman, Young Conaway Stargatt & Taylor, LLP, Wilmington, DE; William Savitt, Ryan A. McLeod, Anitha Reddy, Adam M. Gogolak, David E. Kirk, Zachary M. David, Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz, New York, NY; Peter J. Walsh, Jr., Brian C. Ralston, Tyler J. Leavengood, Jaclyn C. Levy, Potter Anderson & Corroon LLP, Wilmington, DE; Richard B. Harper, Baker Botts LLP, New York, NY; Thomas E. O’Brien, Baker Botts LLP, Dallas, TX for defendants.

    Case Number: D69818

    Summary judgment on director fiduciary claims denied where the evidence was not so overwhelming for the court to find, as a matter of law, that a majority of directors were independent and thus the board could exercise its business judgment to enter into challenged transactions.

  • Horizon Serv., Inc. v. Henry

    Publication Date: 2022-05-17
    Practice Area: Labor Law
    Industry: Construction | Insurance
    Court: Delaware Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Brennan
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Elissa A. Greenberg, Elzufon Austin & Mondell, PA for plaintiff.
    for defendant: Jonathan B. O’Neill, Amanda K. Dobies, Kimmel Carter Roman Peltz & O’Neill, PA; William A. Crawford, Franklin & Prokopik for defendants.

    Case Number: D69815

    Employer's workers' compensation insurer was not entitled to assert a lien on any underinsured motorist coverage recovery obtained by an injured worker from the employer's auto insurer, where the Workers' Compensation Act only permitted reimbursement from a third-party tortfeasor or their insurer.

  • Arendi S.A.R.L. v. LG Elec., Inc.

    Publication Date: 2022-05-17
    Practice Area: Patent Litigation
    Industry: Electronics | Technology Media and Telecom
    Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
    Judge: District Judge Stark
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Neal C. Belgam, Eve H. Omerod, Smith, Katzenstein & Jenkins LLP, Wilmington, DE; Seth Ard, Beatrice Franklin, Max Straus, Susman Godfrey, LLP, New York, NY; John Lahad, Ibituroko-Emi Lawson, Robert Travis Korman, Brenda Adimora, Susman Godfrey, LLP, Houston, TX; Kalpana Srinivasan, Susman Godfrey, LLP, Los Angeles, CA; Kemper Diehl, Susman Godfrey, LLP, Seattle, WA for plaintiff.
    for defendant: Jeremy D. Anderson, Fish & Richardson P.C., Wilmington, DE; Steven R. Katz, Jacob Pecht, Fish & Richardson, P.C., Boston, MA; R. Andrew Schewentker, Fish & Richardson P.C., Washington, DC; Eda Stark, Fish & Richardson P.C., Atlanta, GA; Kenneth L. Dorsney, Cortlan S. Hitch, Morris James LLP, Wilmington, DE; Brian C. Riopelle, David E. Finkelson, McGuireWoods LLP, Richmond, VA; Jason W. Cook, McGuireWoods LLP, Dallas, TX; David E. Moore, Bindu A. Palapura, Stephanie E. O’Byrne, Potter Anderson & Corroon LLP, Wilmington, DE; Robert W. Unikel, Michelle Marek Figueiredo, John Cotiguala, Matt Lind, Paul Hastings LLP, Chicago, IL; Robert R. Laurenzi, Chad J. Peterman, Paul Hastings LLP, New York, NY; Arielle Bratton, Paul Hastings LLP, San Diego, CA; Ginger Anders, Munger, Tolles & Olson LLP, Washington, DC; Rodger D. Smith II, Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP, Wilmington, DE; Jeffri A. Kaminski, Justin E. Pierce, Calvin R. Nelson, Venable LLP, Washington, DC; Neha Bhat, Venable LLP, New York, NY; Jack B. Blumenfeld, Brian P. Egan, Anthony D. Raucci, Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell, LLP, Wilmington, DE; Frank C. Cimino Jr., Megan S. Woodworth, Jeffri A. Kaminsi, Calvin R. Nelson, Neha Bhat, Venable, Washington, DC for defendants.

    Case Number: D69819

    Court denied defendants' motions for summary judgment of non-infringement where the evidence created a triable issue as to whether defendants' accused products met the claim limitation of a "document" because the product applications could have permitted users to edit files in the application.