Don’t forget you can visit MyAlerts to manage your alerts at any time.
96 results for '* judge:"Vice Chancellor Slights"' You can use Search Constraints to get even better search results
Publication Date: 2020-05-13
Practice Area: Corporate Governance
Industry: Consumer Products | Investments and Investment Advisory | Manufacturing
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Vice Chancellor Slights
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Seth D. Rigrodsky, Brian D. Long and Gina M. Serra, Rigrodsky & Long, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Melinda A. Nicholson and Ni-colas Kravitz of Kahn Swick & Foti, LLC, New Orleans, LA for lead plaintiffs.
for defendant: R. Judson Scaggs, Jr., Susan W. Waesco and Riley T. Svikhart, Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP, Wilmington, DE; Susan S. Muck, Catherine D. Kevane, and Marie C. Bafus, Fenwick & West LLP, San Francisco, California for director defendants and nominal defendant GoPro, Inc.
Case Number: D68979
Plaintiffs in this stockholder derivative matter failed to demonstrate demand futility. The court found that demand was not excused, so it granted defendants' motion to dismiss.
Publication Date: 2020-05-06
Practice Area: Corporate Governance
Industry: Investments and Investment Advisory
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Vice Chancellor Slights
Attorneys: For plaintiff: David A. Jenkins, Neal C. Belgam, and Jennifer M. Rutter, Smith Katzenstein & Jenkins LLP, Wilmington, DE; Steven J. Purcell, Douglas E. Julie, Robert H. Lefkowitz, and Kaitlyn T. Devenyns, Purcell Julie & Lefkowitz LLP, New York, NY for plaintiff.
for defendant: Kenneth J. Nachbar, Megan Ward Cascio, Zi-Xiang Shen, and Miranda N. Gilbert, Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP, Wilmington, DE for defendants.
Case Number: D68966
Motion to dismiss derivative complaint denied where plaintiff's allegation of an explicit quid pro quo among directors provided sufficient particularity to plead demand futility.
Publication Date: 2020-04-15
Practice Area: Employment Litigation
Industry: Health Care
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Vice Chancellor Slights
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Gregory B. Williams and E. Chaney Hall, Fox Rothschild LLP, Wilmington, DE; Jeffrey J. Bushofsky and Timothy R. Farrell, Ropes & Gray LLP, Chicago, IL for plaintiffs.
for defendant: Travis S. Hunter and Tyler E. Cragg, Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Grant A. Wright and Max D. Wright, Wright Law, P.C., Tuscumbia, AL for defendants.
Case Number: D68945
The court denied plaintiffs' request for a preliminary injunction that would have shut down defendants' competing business, because plaintiffs failed to establish that they were likely to succeed on the merits.
Publication Date: 2020-04-15
Practice Area: Corporate Governance
Industry: Consumer Products
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Vice Chancellor Slights
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Blake A. Bennett, Cooch and Taylor, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Brian J. Robbins, Stephen J. Oddo and Steven R. Wedeking, Rob-bins Arroyo LLP, San Diego, CA for plaintiff.
for defendant: Bradley R. Aronstam and Roger S. Stronach, Ross Aronstam & Moritz LLP, Wilmington, DE; Joseph S. Allerhand, Stephen A. Radin and Thomas G. James, Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP, New York, NY for individual defendants and nominal corporate defendant.
Case Number: D68947
In this derivative action, plaintiff failed to demonstrate demand futility, so the court granted defendants' motion to dismiss the complaint in its entirety.
Publication Date: 2020-04-01
Practice Area: Corporate Entities
Industry: Energy
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Vice Chancellor Slights
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Francis G.X. Pileggi, Eckert Seamans Cherin & Mellott, LLC, Wilmington, DE; Michael G. Platner, John S. Poulos and Vincent F. Alexander, Lewis Brisbois Bisgaard & Smith LLP, Fort Lauderdale, FL for plaintiff.
for defendant: Andrew D. Cordo, Shannon E. German, Nora M. Crawford, Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati, P.C., Wilmington, DE ; Mat-thew A. Feldman, Todd G. Cosenza, Charles D. Cording, Willkie Farr & Gallagher LLP, New York, NY for defendant.
Case Number: D68931
An entity that had only an indirect equity interest in a limited liability company did not qualify to seek statutory dissolution of the LLC because it was neither a member nor a manager, and it was not entitled to dissolve the company as a matter of equity. Motion to dismiss granted.
Law Journal Press | Digital Book
Authors: Jonathan H. Lomurro, Gary L. Riveles, Abbott S. Brown
View this BookView more book results for the query "*"
Publication Date: 2020-02-19
Practice Area: Business Torts
Industry: Insurance
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Vice Chancellor Slights
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Peter B. Andrews, Craig J. Springer, and David M. Sborz, Andrews & Springer LLC, Wilmington, DE; Edward F. Haber, Thomas V. Urmy, Jr., Patrick J. Vallely, and Michelle H. Blauner, Shapiro Haber & Urmy LLP, Boston, MA for plaintiffs.
for defendant: Daniel A. Dreisbach, Srinivas M. Raju, Susan M. Hannigan, Sarah A. Clark, and Angela Lam, Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Reid L. Ashinoff and Gary Meyerhoff, Dentons US LLP, New York, NY for defendants.
Case Number: D68878
Plaintiffs entitled to insurance benefits or sales commissions had standing to bring a Delaware Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act claim where they could seek to reverse transfers that allegedly posed "material risk of harm" to their payments before the transfers resulted in dissipation of the assets.
Publication Date: 2020-02-19
Practice Area: Corporate Governance
Industry: Automotive
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Vice Chancellor Slights
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Jay W. Eisenhofer, Christine M. Mackintosh, Kelly L. Tucker, Vivek Upadhya and Daniel L. Berger, Grant & Eisenhofer, Wilmington, DE and New York, NY; Lee D. Rudy, Eric L. Zagar, Robin Winchester and Justin O. Reliford, Kessler Topaz Meltzer & Check, LLP, Radnor, PA; Randall J. Baron, David T. Wissbroecker and Maxwell R. Huffman, Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP, San Diego, CA for co-lead plaintiffs.
for defendant: David E. Ross, Garrett B. Moritz and Benjamin Z. Grossberg, Ross Aronstam & Moritz LLP, Wilmington, DE; Evan R. Chesler, Daniel Slifkin, Vanessa A. Lavely and Helam Gebremariam, Cravath, Swaine & Moore LLP, New York, NY for director defendants.
Case Number: D68883
Genuine issues of material fact precluded summary judgment regarding questions of shareholder ratification of a merger, the existence of a conflicted controller and corporate waste.
Publication Date: 2020-01-15
Practice Area: Mergers and Acquisitions
Industry: Distribution and Wholesale
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Vice Chancellor Slights
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Blake A. Bennett, Cooch and Taylor, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Juan E. Monteverde and Miles D. Schreiner, Monteverde & Associates PC, New York, NY; Donald J. Enright and Elizabeth K. Tripodi, Levi & Korsinsky, LLP, Washington, DC for plaintiffs.
for defendant: Robert S. Saunders, Arthur R. Bookout, and Lilianna Anh P. Townsend, Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP, Wilmington, DE; Gregory P. Williams, Lisa A. Schmidt, Matthew D. Perri, and Angela Lam, Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A., Wilmington, DE; and Matthew Solum, P.C., and Ian Spain, of Kirkland & Ellis LLP, New York, NY for defendants.
Case Number: D68839
Stockholders' breach of fiduciary duty claims arising from board's rejection of existing merger agreement in favor of all-cash acquisition offer dismissed where stockholders failed to make prima facie case of board's breach of the duty of loyalty and where acquirer's stake in the company was insufficient to make it a controlling stockholder for the purposes of an aiding and abetting claim.
Publication Date: 2019-11-20
Practice Area: Corporate Governance
Industry: E-Commerce | State and Local Government
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Vice Chancellor Slights
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Robert J. Kriner, Jr., Scott M. Tucker, Tiffany J. Cramer and Vera G. Belger, Chimicles Schwartz Kriner & Donaldson-Smith LLP, Wilmington, DE for plaintiffs.
for defendant: David E. Ross and R. Garrett Rice, Ross Aronstam & Moritz LLP, Wilmington, DE for defendant.
Case Number: D68777
Plaintiffs were not entitled to corporate books and records because they failed to demonstrate a credible basis to infer corporate wrongdoing.
Publication Date: 2019-11-06
Practice Area: Contractual Disputes
Industry: Energy | Investments and Investment Advisory
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Vice Chancellor Slights
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Paul J. Lockwood, Robert A. Weber, Nicole A. DiSalvo, Skadden Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom, Wilmington, DE; George A. Zimmerman, Jonathan Frank, Tansy Woan, Andrew N. Goldman and Charles C. Platt, Skadden Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom, New York, NY for PPL plaintiffs.
for defendant: Thomas G. Macauley, Macauley LLC, Wilmington, DE; Joshua L. Siefert of Joshua L. Siefert PLLC, New York, NY for plaintiff Farr. Rolin P. Bissell and James M. Yoch, Jr., Young Conaway Stargatt & Taylor, LLP, Wilmington, DE; Michael C. Holmes, Melissa L. James and Devin L. Kerns, Vinson & Elkins LLP, Dallas, TX for Riverstone, Raven Power, C/R Energy and Sapphire Power defendants. David E. Ross and R. Garrett Rice, Ross Aronstam & Moritz LLP, Wilmington, DE; Karl Stern and Kate K. Shih, Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP, New York, NY; Andrew J. Rossman, Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP, New York NY; Adam B. Wolfson of Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP, Los Angeles, CA for Talen defendants.
Case Number: D68763
The court denied defendant's motion to dismiss or stay this action, because the agreement at issue contained a Delaware fo-rum selection clause.
Legal Speak is a weekly podcast that makes sense of what’s happening in the legal industry.
1 minute read