• In re Facebook, Inc. Section 220 Litig.

    Publication Date: 2019-06-12
    Practice Area: Corporate Entities
    Industry: E-Commerce
    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; Geoffrey M. Johnson, Donald A. Broggi, Scott R. Jacobsen and Jing-Li Yu, Scott+Scott Attorneys at Law LLP, Cleveland Heights, OH and New York, NY for plaintiff City of Birmingham Relief and Retirement System. Ryan M. Ernst, O'Kelly Ernst & Joyce, LLC, Wilmington, DE; Thomas J. McKenna and Gregory M. Egleston, Gainey McKenna & Egleston, New York, NY for plaintiff Lidia Levy.
    for defendant: David E. Ross and R. Garrett Rice, Ross of Aronstam & Moritz LLP, Wilmington, DE; Orin Snyder, Kristin A. Linsley, Brian M. Lutz, Paul J. Collins and Joshua S. Lipshutz, Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP, New York, NY, San Francisco, CA, Palo Alto, CA and Washington, DC for defendant.

    Case Number: D68594

    Plaintiffs provided a credible basis to support their demand for corporate books and records, because they presented some ev-idence of the company's failure to ensure the privacy of users' data.

  • Greenhouse v. Polychain Fund I LP

    Publication Date: 2019-06-12
    Practice Area: Corporate Entities
    Industry: Investments and Investment Advisory
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Vice Chancellor Slights
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Joseph H. Huston, Jr. and Stacey A. Scrivani, Stevens & Lee, P.C., Wilmington, DE; Todd C. Toral and AnnaMarie A. VanHoesen, Jenner & Block LLP, Los Angeles, CA for plaintiff.
    for defendant: Jeffrey M. Gorris and Christopher P. Quinn, Friedlander & Gorris, P.A., Wilmington, DE; J. Noah Hagey and Taylor Altman, Braunhagey & Borden LLP, New York, NY for defendants.

    Case Number: D68593

    A former limited partner no longer had standing to request books and records, because his interest in the company was fully redeemed at the time of the request.

  • Stein v. Blankfein

    Publication Date: 2019-06-12
    Practice Area: Corporate Governance
    Industry: Investments and Investment Advisory
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Vice Chancellor Glasscock
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Bruce E. Farnan, Michael J. Farnan and Rosemary J. Piergiovanni, Farnan LLP, Wilmington, DE; A. Arnold Gershon and Mi-chael A. Toomey, Barrack, Rodos & Bacine, New York, NY for plaintiff.
    for defendant: Kevin G. Abrams, J. Peter Shindel, Jr. and Matthew L. Miller, Abrams & Bayliss LLP, Wilmington, DE; Robert J. Guiffra, Jr. and David M.J. Rein, Sullivan & Cromwell LLP, New York, NY for director defendants. Gregory V. Varallo, Kevin M. Gallagher and Robert L. Burns, Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A., Wilmington, DE for The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc.

    Case Number: D68597

    The entire fairness standard of review applied to the question of director self-compensation.

  • AG Oncon, LLC v. Ligand Pharm. Inc.

    Publication Date: 2019-06-05
    Practice Area: Securities Litigation
    Industry: Investments and Investment Advisory | Pharmaceuticals
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Vice Chancellor Laster
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Elena C. Norman and Daniel M. Kirshenbaum, Young Conaway Stargatt & Taylor, LLP, Wilmington, DE; Keith N. Sambur, Martin G. Durkin, and Andrew T. Gillespie, Holland & Knight, LLP, New York, NY for plaintiffs
    for defendant: David E. Ross, Jr. and R. Garrett Rice, Ross Aronstam & Moritz LLP, Wilmington, DE; Blair Connelly and Zachary L. Rowen, Latham & Watkins LLP, New York, NY for defendant.

    Case Number: D68582

    Convertible note issuer could amend indenture's conversion formula where indenture expressly authorized issuer to conform to the terms of the offering memorandum.

  • Shareholder Representative Serv. LLC v. RSI Holdco, LLC

    Publication Date: 2019-06-05
    Practice Area: Mergers and Acquisitions
    Industry: Investments and Investment Advisory | Technology Media and Telecom
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Vice Chancellor McCormick
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Rudolf Koch, Susan M. Hannigan and Matthew W. Murphy, Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Christopher F. Robertson and Alison K. Eggers, Seyfarth Shaw LLP, Boston, MA for plaintiffs and third-party defendants
    for defendant: John P. DiTomo and Jarrett W. Horowitz, Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP, Wilmington, DE; Roberto M. Braceras, Adam Slutsky and Ezekiel L. Hill, Goodwin Procter LLP, Boston, MA for defendants/third-party plaintiffs

    Case Number: D68588

    In this merger litigation, defendants named only some stockholders in their third-party complaint, but the court dismissed de-fendants' request for rescission because all of the stockholders were indispensable parties. Defendants' unjust enrichment claim survived a motion to dismiss.

  • Brown v. Rite Aid Corp.

    Publication Date: 2019-06-05
    Practice Area: Corporate Governance
    Industry: Retail
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Vice Chancellor Zurn
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: John M. Seaman and Matthew L. Miller, Abrams & Bayliss LLP, Wilmington, DE; Ray Shepard, The Shepard Law Firm LLC, Pasadena, MD for plaintiff
    for defendant: David J. Margules, Jessica C. Watt, and Evan W. Krick, Ballard Spahr LLP, Wilmington, DE; William A. Slaughter and William B. Igoe, Ballard Spahr LLP, Philadelphia, PA for defendant

    Case Number: D68583

    Former director/officer was entitled to mandatory indemnification by prevailing in corporate lawsuit against him for acts taken in his official capacity by ultimately enforcing court's prior order barring corporation from asserting suits against its directors and officers.

  • Germaninvestments AG v. Allomet Corp.

    Publication Date: 2019-06-05
    Practice Area: Contractual Disputes
    Industry: Investments and Investment Advisory | Manufacturing
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Vice Chancellor Slights
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: R. Craig Martin, Ethan H. Townsend and Peter H. Kyle, Wilmington, DE for plaintiffs
    for defendant: John P. DiTomo, Ryan D. Stottmann and Coleen Hill, Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP, Wilmington, DE for defendants

    Case Number: D68585

    A forum selection clause in the parties' agreement was mandatory. Motion to dismiss granted, without prejudice.

  • Acela Invs. LLC v. DiFalco

    Publication Date: 2019-05-29
    Practice Area: Corporate Governance
    Industry: Pharmaceuticals
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Chancellor Bouchard
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Peter B. Ladig and Brett M. McCartney, Bayard, P.A., Wilmington, DE; David H. Wollmuth and Michael C. Ledley, Wollmuth Maher & Deutsch LLP, New York, NY for plaintiffs
    for defendant: Norman M. Monhait and Carmella P. Keener, Rosenthal, Monhait & Goddess, P.A., Wilmington, DE; William T. Reid, IV, Michael Yoder, Jordan L. Vimont, and Ryan M. Goldstein, Reid Collins & Tsai LLP, Austin, TX for defendants.

    Case Number: D68574

    Judicial dissolution of LLC warranted where manager attempted to amass unilateral control in violation of operating agreement's requirement that managers advise and consent on all board decisions and the operating agreement contained no workable mechanism to allow managers to break their deadlock.

  • In the Matter of the Liquidation of Indem. Ins. Corp.

    Publication Date: 2019-05-29
    Practice Area: Creditors' and Debtors' Rights
    Industry: Financial Services and Banking | Insurance
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Vice Chancellor Zurn
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Christopher P. Simon and Kevin S. Mann, Cross & Simon, LLC, Wilmington, DE; James J. Black III, Jef-frey B. Miceli and Mark W. Drasnin, Black & Gerngross, P.C., Philadelphia, PA for Delaware Ins. Comm'r as receiver for Indemnity Ins. Co, RRG.
    for defendant: David S. Eagle, Sally E. Veghte and Francis M. Correll, Klehr Harrison Harvey Branzburg LLP, Wilming-ton, DE and Philadelphia, PA for intervening third-party plaintiff Branch Banking and Trust Co.

    Case Number: D68579

    The court granted a bank's motion for summary judgment to exclude a receiver's equitable defenses, because the bank sought only legal relief.

  • Mehta v. Mobile Posse, Inc.

    Publication Date: 2019-05-22
    Practice Area: Mergers and Acquisitions
    Industry: Advertising | Investments and Investment Advisory | Software
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Vice Chancellor McCormick
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Marcus E. Montejo and John G. Day, Prickett, Jones & Elliott, P.A., Wilmington, DE for plaintiff.
    for defendant: Rafael X. Zahralddin and Jonathan M. Stemerman, Elliott Greenleaf, P.C., Wilmington, DE for defendants.

    Case Number: D68470

    In this case involving a corporate merger, the company and its board were not entitled to judgment on the pleadings where they did not comply with statutory notice requirements regarding appraisal rights.