Don’t forget you can visit MyAlerts to manage your alerts at any time.
45 results for '* topic:"Securities Litigation"' You can use Search Constraints to get even better search results
Publication Date: 2024-04-22
Practice Area: Securities Litigation
Industry: Investments and Investment Advisory
Court: Delaware Superior Court
Judge: Judge Rennie
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Kevin R. Shannon, Christopher N. Kelly, Justin T. Hymes, Esquire, Potter Anderson & Corroon LLP, Wilmington, DE; William C. O’Neil, Jeffrey J. Huelskamp, Gretchen Scavo, Winston & Strawn LLP, Chicago, IL; Marisa E. Witter, Winston & Strawn LLP, Houston, TX for plaintiff.
for defendant: Rudolf Koch, Travis S. Hunter, Alexander M. Krischik, Elizabeth J. Freud, Griffin A. Schoenbaum, Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A., Wilmington, DE; James G. Sawtelle, Sherman & Howard L.L.C., Denver, CO; R. Montgomery Donaldson, Montgomery, McCracken, Walker & Rhoads, LLP, Wilmington, DE; B. John Casey, Ryan H. Tamm, Stoel Rives LLP, Portland, OR for defendants.
Case Number: N23C-07-209 SKR CCLD
Court declined to dismiss fraud claims as untimely under contractual limitations period where the parties' contract expressly exempted fraud claims from the scope of the contractual indemnity provisions containing the survival clauses.
Publication Date: 2024-04-22
Practice Area: Securities Litigation
Industry: Retail
Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
Judge: District Judge Connolly
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Brian E. Farnan, Michael J. Farnan, Farnan LLP, Wilmington, DE; Sara Fuks, The Rosen Law Firm, P.A., New York, NY for plaintiffs.
for defendant: Robert W. Whetzel, Raymond J. DiCamillo, John M. O'Toole, Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Sean M. Berkowitz, Nicholas J. Siciliano, Latham & Watkins LLP, Chicago, IL for defendants.
Case Number: 21-55-CFC
Stockholders failed to adequately plead that securities filings were materially false or misleading where statements adequately conveyed that the company was subject to investigations and securities laws did not require corporations to guess as to the likely outcome of such investigations.
Publication Date: 2024-03-11
Practice Area: Securities Litigation
Industry: Health Care | Investments and Investment Advisory | Technology Media and Telecom
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Vice Chancellor Glasscock
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Philip Trainer, Jr., Marie M. Degnan, Randall J. Teti, Ashby & Geddes, Wilmington, DE; Marcos D. Jimenez, Marcos D. Jimenez, P.A., Miami, FL for plaintiffs.
for defendant: Ryan P. Newell, Lakshmi A. Muthu, Tara C. Pakrouh, Michael A. Carbonara, Jr., Young Conaway Stargatt & Taylor, LLP, Wilmington, DE; Michael C. Heyden, Jr., Joseph E. Brenner, Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani, LLP, Wilmington, DE for defendants.
Case Number: 2020-1004-SG
Although defendant prevailed on some claims asserted by plaintiff, plaintiff was the prevailing party in the overall litigation as the central issue in the case was the validity and enforceability of the parties' contracts, and thus plaintiff was entitled to legal fees and costs under the contractual fee-shifting provisions.
Publication Date: 2024-02-19
Practice Area: Securities Litigation
Industry: Financial Services and Banking | Investments and Investment Advisory
Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
Judge: District Judge Wallach
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Francis J. Murphy, Jr., Jonathan L. Parshall, Murphy, Spadaro & Landon, Wilmington, DE; Steven M. Coren, Benjamin M. Mather, Matthew R. Williams, Kauffman, Coren & Ress, P.C, Philadelphia, PA for plaintiffs.
for defendant: Brian M. Rostocki, Anne M. Steadman, Justin M. Forcier, Reed Smith LLP, Wilmington, DE; Jonathan K. Youngwood, Janet A. Gochman, Tyler A. Anger, Katherine A. Hardiman, Simpson, Thacher & Bartlett, New York, NY; Kevin R. Shannon, Daniel Rusk, Potter Anderson & Corroon LLP, Wilmington, DE; Tracy Richelle High, Scott A. Foltz, Sullivan & Cromwell LLP, New York, NY for defendants.
Case Number: 15-00897-EJW
Although plaintiffs' experts' report in support of their damages theory for class certification used sufficiently reliable methodologies under the Daubert standard, the evidence was wholly speculative to demonstrate economic loss or proximate causation, such that plaintiffs could not meet the commonality or predominance standards.
Publication Date: 2023-11-27
Practice Area: Securities Litigation
Industry: Electronics | Health Care | Software
Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
Judge: District Judge Bryson
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 23-700-WCB
Court declined to dismiss securities and common law fraud claims where acquirer failed to disclose the existence of its obligations under a competing earnout agreement when negotiating acquisition of a company.
Law Journal Press | Digital Book
Authors: George Bochetto, David P. Heim, John A. O’Connell, Robert S. Tintner
View this BookView more book results for the query "*"
Publication Date: 2023-09-11
Practice Area: Securities Litigation
Industry: Financial Services and Banking | Investments and Investment Advisory
Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
Judge: District Judge Wallach
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Francis J. Murphy, Jr., Jonathan L. Parshall, Murphy, Spadaro & Landon, Wilmington, DE; Steven M. Coren, Benjamin M. Mather, Matthew R. Williams, Kauffman, Coren & Ress, P.C, Philadelphia, PA for plaintiffs.
for defendant: Brian M. Rostocki, Anne M. Steadman, Justin M. Forcier, Reed Smith LLP, Wilmington, DE; Jonathan K. Youngwood, Janet A. Gochman, Tyler A. Anger, Katherine A. Hardiman, Simpson, Thacher & Bartlett, New York, NY; Kevin R. Shannon, Jonathan A. Choa, Daniel Rusk, Potter Anderson & Corroon LLP, Wilmington, DE; Tracy Richelle High, Scott A. Foltz, Sullivan & Cromwell LLP, New York, NY for defendants.
Case Number: 15-00897-EJW
Court declined to exclude expert report in support of class certification where unreliability of trading model was not fatal to the reliability and admissibility of the report's event study, but plaintiffs' theories of damages in their expert report did not encompass some damages experienced by certain sophisticated investors.
Publication Date: 2023-07-17
Practice Area: Securities Litigation
Industry: Insurance | Investments and Investment Advisory
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Judge: Judge Phipps
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Joseph D. Daley, Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd, San Diego, CA; Peter S. Pearlman, Cohn Lifland Pearlman Herrmann & Knopf, Saddle Brook, NJ; Daniel J. Pfefferbaum, Shawn A. Williams, Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd, San Francisco, CA; Douglas Wilens, Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd, Boca Raton, FL for appellant.
for defendant: David D. Cramer, Tricia B. O’Reilly, Walsh Pizzi O’Reilly & Falanga, Newark, NJ; Maeve L. O’Connor, Susan R. Gittes, Aasiya F.M. Glover, Debevoise & Plimpton, New York, NY for appellees.
Case Number: 21-1147
Stockholder sufficiently alleged false or misleading corporate statements where life insurance company reported normal or slightly negative mortality experience only weeks prior to announcing massive increase in reserves, and stockholder had confidential internal information indicating the company had already been contemplating increasing reserves.
Publication Date: 2023-06-06
Practice Area: Securities Litigation
Industry: E-Commerce
Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
Judge: District Judge Fallon
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 22-1164-CFC-SRF
Court granted motion for leave to amend securities complaint where no scheduling order had been entered in the case and no defendant had raised a claim that amendment would result in undue prejudice.
Publication Date: 2023-05-23
Practice Area: Securities Litigation
Industry: E-Commerce
Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
Judge: District Judge Fallon
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 22-1164-CFC-SRF
Court granted motion for leave to amend securities lawsuit where the motion was made prior to the issuance of a scheduling order and no defendant argued that the amended pleading was futile or would cause them undue prejudice.
Publication Date: 2022-08-30
Practice Area: Securities Litigation
Industry: Retail | Technology Media and Telecom
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Judge: Judge Greenaway
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: D69937
Court affirmed district court's dismissal of claims under federal and state securities law finding that a failure to disclose the possibility that legal action could result as a part of an asset acquisition did not qualify as a material fact for the purposes of omission arguments.
Legal Speak is a weekly podcast that makes sense of what’s happening in the legal industry.
1 minute read