Don’t forget you can visit MyAlerts to manage your alerts at any time.
448 results for '* industry:"Investments and Investment Advisory"' You can use Search Constraints to get even better search results
Publication Date: 2023-05-09
Practice Area: Mergers and Acquisitions
Industry: Investments and Investment Advisory
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Vice Chancellor Fioravanti
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Richard L. Renck, Michael B. Gonen, Duane Morris, LLP, Wilmington, DE; Michael P. Gallagher, Duane Morris, LLP, Philadelphia, PA for plaintiff.
for defendant: Lisa A. Schmidt, Matthew W. Murphy, Nicole M. Henry, Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A., Wilmington, DE; David P. Whittlesey, Jacob Fields, Shearman & Sterling LLP, Austin, TX for defendant.
Case Number: 2022-0166-PAF
Earn-out provision requiring successor company to secure new agreement was not triggered where company merely amended its existing agreement with a customer by rescinding the customer's notice of termination.
Publication Date: 2023-05-02
Practice Area: Corporate Governance
Industry: Energy | Investments and Investment Advisory
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Vice Chancellor Will
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Michael J. Barry, Jason M. Avellino, Kelly L. Tucker, Grant & Eisenhofer, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Peter B. Andrews, Craig J. Springer, David M. Sborz, Andrew J. Peach, Andrews & Springer LLC, Wilmington, DE; Jeremy S. Friedman, David F.E. Tejtel, Christopher M. Windover, Friedman Oster & Tejtel PLLC, Bedford Hills, NY for plaintiffs.
for defendant: A. Thompson Bayliss, Matthew L. Miller, Abrams & Bayliss LLP, Wilmington, DE; Karl Stern, Elizabeth M. Devaney, Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan LLP, Houston, TX for defendant.
Case Number: 2019-0201-LWW
Although special litigation committee had a defect in consisting of only one director, that director's independence and the thoroughness of their investigation supported finding that its judgment to terminate derivative litigation was made following diligent and good-faith analysis.
Publication Date: 2023-04-25
Practice Area: Bankruptcy
Industry: Financial Services and Banking | E-Commerce | Investments and Investment Advisory
Court: U.S. Bankruptcy Court
Judge: Judge Dorsey
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 20-12836 (JTD)
Claims of aiding and abetting breaches of fiduciary duties failed where plaintiff failed to plead facts showing that defendants knew of debtor company's problems or that knowledge of those problems would alert defendants to debtor's officers' breaches of fiduciary duties.
Publication Date: 2023-04-25
Practice Area: Mergers and Acquisitions
Industry: Investments and Investment Advisory | Software
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Judge: Judge Greenaway
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 21-3207
Pre-signing efforts to collect past-due invoice did not breach representations in stock purchase agreement and were not outside the ordinary course of business.
Publication Date: 2023-04-11
Practice Area: Contracts
Industry: E-Commerce | Investments and Investment Advisory
Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
Judge: District Judge Bibas
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Kathleen M. Miller, Smith, Katzenstein & Jenkins LLP, Wilmington, DE; Massimo D’Angelo, Akerman LLP, New York, NY for plaintiffs.
for defendant: Raymond J. DiCamillo, Christine Dealy Haynes, Richards, Layton & Finger, PA, Wilmington, DE; Christopher Andrews, Cooley LLP, San Francisco, CA for defendants.
Case Number: 20-cv-1556-SB
Unilateral mistake claim not dismissed where plaintiffs plausibly alleged they were unaware of defendants' failure to amend the parties' contract as agreed and that defendants knew of plaintiffs' mistake.
Law Journal Press | Digital Book
Authors:
View this BookView more book results for the query "*"
Publication Date: 2023-04-11
Practice Area: Mergers and Acquisitions
Industry: Investments and Investment Advisory
Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
Judge: District Judge Noreika
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Sue L. Robinson, Brian E. Farnan, Michael J. Farnan, Farnan LLP, Wilmington, DE; Andrew J. Entwistle, Entwistle & Cappucci LLP, Austin, TX; Vincent R. Cappucci, Arthur V. Nealon, Brendan J. Brodeur, Jonathan H. Beemer, Jessica A. Margulis, Entwistle & Cappucci LLP, New York, NY; Marc M. Seltzer, Krysta Kauble Pachman, Susman Godfrey L.L.P., Los Angeles, CA for plaintiffs.
for defendant: A. Thompson Bayliss, April M. Ferraro, Christopher Fitzpatrick Cannataro, Abrams & Bayliss LLP, Wilmington, DE; Alan S. Goudiss, K. Mallory Brennan, Sherman & Sterling LLP, New York, NY; Christian E. Myrold, Shearman & Sterling LLP, San Francisco, CA; Matthew D. Stachel, Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP, Wilmington, DE; Jaren Janghorbani, Geoffrey Chepiga, Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP, New York, NY for defendants.
Case Number: 20-275 (MN) (JLH)
Court hearing claims under §14(a) properly excluded shareholders who sold their stock after the merger approval vote but before closing, since their alleged pecuniary injury did not directly arise from the challenged merger.
Publication Date: 2023-04-04
Practice Area: Corporate Governance
Industry: Distribution and Wholesale | Investments and Investment Advisory | Pharmaceuticals
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Vice Chancellor Laster
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Samuel L. Closic, Eric J. Juray, Robert B. Lackey, Prickett, Jones & Elliott, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Gregory V. Varallo, Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann LLP, Wilmington, DE; Lee D. Rudy, Eric L. Zagar, Kessler Topaz Meltzer & Check, LLP, Radnor, PA; Jeroen van Kwawegen, Eric J. Riedel, Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann LLP, New York, NY; Frank R. Schirripa, Daniel B. Rehns, Kurt Hunciker, Hillary Nappi, Hach Rose Schirripa & Cheverie LLP, New York, NY; Gregory Mark Nespole, Daniel Tepper, Levi & Korsinsky, LLP, New York, NY; Brian J. Robbins, Craig W. Smith, Robbins LLP, San Diego, CA for plaintiffs.
for defendant: Stephen C. Norman, Jennifer C. Wasson, Tyler J. Leavengood, Potter Anderson & Corroon LLP, Wilmington, DE; Michael S. Doluisio, Carla Graff, Dechert LLP, Philadelphia, PA; Matthew L. Larrabee, Hayoung Park, Dechert LLP, New York, New York; Michael D. Blanchard, Amelia Pennington, Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP, Boston, MA for defendants.
Case Number: 2021-1118-JTL
Court denied relief from dismissal of action, after a state court found defendant directors and officers had not violated the law, where newly-filed DOJ complaint against the company remained unsubstantiated and did not contain allegations against defendants specifically.
Publication Date: 2023-04-04
Practice Area: Insurance Law
Industry: Financial Services and Banking | Insurance | Investments and Investment Advisory
Court: Delaware Supreme Court
Judge: Justice Traynor
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Kevin G. Abrams, John M. Seaman, Samuel D. Cordle, Abrams & Bayliss LLP, Wilmington, DE; Harry S. Davis, Robert E. Griffin, Schulte Roth & Zabel LLP, New York, NY for appellant.
for defendant: Gregory F. Fischer, Cozen O’Connor, Wilmington, DE; Joseph M. Kelleher, Brian D. Burack, Cozen O’Connor, Philadelphia, PA for appellee.
Case Number: N18C-07-289
Courts had to conduct fault-based analysis evaluating the parties' knowledge or inquiry notice of the illegality of life insurance policies ultimately deemed to be stranger originated life insurance policies when determining whether to order disgorgement of paid premiums or allow the insurer to retain the premiums.
Publication Date: 2023-03-21
Practice Area: Discovery
Industry: E-Commerce | Investments and Investment Advisory
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Vice Chancellor Laster
Attorneys: For plaintiff: A. Thompson Bayliss, Daniel J. McBride, Anthony R. Sarna, Abrams & Bayliss LLP, Wilmington, DE for petitioners.
for defendant: Paul J. Lockwood, Jenness E. Parker, Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP, Wilmington, DE; Patricia L. Enerio, Jamie L. Brown, Aaron M. Nelson, Elizabeth A. DeFelice, Heyman Enerio Gattuso & Hirzel LLP, Wilmington, DE; Stephen J. Senderowitz, Dentons, Chicago, IL; Douglas W. Henkin, Dentons, New York, NY for respondents.
Case Number: 2022-0344-JTL
Court granted motion to compel on the grounds that defendant corporation could not invoke the attorney-client privilege as a means to withhold materials within a certain time frame spanning over two years. The court did however hold that the corporation could assert the privilege regarding communications that were related to books and records that the director had intentionally released, thus removing it from the circle of confidentiality.
Publication Date: 2023-03-14
Practice Area: Corporate Governance
Industry: Investments and Investment Advisory
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Vice Chancellor Will
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Michael J. Barry, Grant & Eisenhoffer, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Michael Klausner, Stanford, CA, attorneys for plaintiff;
for defendant: John L. Reed, Ronald N. Brown & Kelly L. Freund, DLA Piper LLP (US), Wilmington, DE; Melanie E. Walker & Gaspard Rappoport, DLA Piper LLP (US), Los Angeles, CA, attorneys for defendants.
Case Number: 2021-0821-LWW
Breach of fiduciary duty claims arising from SPAC merger could proceed where plaintiff plausibly pled claims under entire fairness review by asserting that proxy statement contained material misstatements and omissions.
Legal Speak is a weekly podcast that makes sense of what’s happening in the legal industry.
1 minute read