0 results for 'null'
Appeals Court Dismisses Fraud Suit Over Failure to Prove Scienter
The 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a decision by the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware to dismiss all claims against a transportation company, ruling that the plaintiffs were unable to prove material misrepresentation with scienter.Chancery Dismisses Shareholder Suit Over Falsified Verifications
The Delaware Court of Chancery has dismissed a lawsuit filed against a medical device company by two of its shareholders because the plaintiffs, including a Philadelphia attorney, filed three verifications that were improperly notarized by a notary public who did not personally witness the second plaintiff sign the documents.Chandler Retirement Spurs Replacement Speculation
The Delaware legal community is abuzz with speculation about a replacement for Chancellor William B. Chandler III, who announced his retirement earlier this week. Six possible candidates have emerged, with Samuel Glasscock III and Mary Johnston as the likely favorites, according to sources familiar with the situation.Justices Uphold Fine for Spoliation of Electronically Stored Evidence
The Delaware Supreme Court, clarifying the rules regarding the preservation of electronic discovery, said that the Court of Chancery did not abuse its discretion when it held a defendant in contempt for spoliation of evidence in Genger v. TR Investors LLC.Chancery Fine-Tunes Jurisdiction in Reinsurance Co. Insolvency
In a case of first impression, the Delaware Chancery Court ruled this month that it has original and exclusive jurisdiction over the in rem proceedings of an insolvent insurance company's assets, but it does not have exclusive jurisdiction over all claims brought against an insurer.View more book results for the query "*"

What's Behind the Chancery Court's New Rule 5.1
On January 1, Court of Chancery Rule 5.1 became effective, replacing the now-deleted Rule 5(g). The adoption of Rule 5.1 represents a fundamental change to most aspects of the handling of confidential filings in the Court of Chancery. As with any rule, the drafters attempted to craft the rule to account for almost all situations, cognizant of the fact that application of the rule likely would reveal unintended consequences that would need to be addressed in the future. Until the court has sufficient information to determine whether any amendments are necessary, an understanding of the purpose behind certain of the changes in the handling of confidential filings may help bridge any unintended gaps. While the factors listed below are by no means exhaustive, the key tenets behind Rule 5.1 should provide some guidance in uncertain situations.
Shareholder Lawsuit Against Diamond Foods Dismissed Under McWane Doctrine
The Delaware Court of Chancery invoked the McWane doctrine last week when it dismissed with prejudice a shareholder lawsuit against Diamond Foods Inc. because the plaintiffs filed lawsuits alleging similar claims in both California state and federal courts prior to pursuing litigation in Delaware. In dismissing the plaintiffs' claims, the Chancery Court held that their lawsuit cannot proceed in Delaware because they had first chosen to litigate in California.
Download Now
Download Now
Download Now
Download Now