0 results for 'Prickett, Jones & Elliott, P.A.'
Laster Bellwether Decision: AT&T Undercut Partners By Over $9M
Vice Chancellor Travis Laster blasted AT&T as "the most obstructive litigant" that he had ever seen, as a judge or a practicing lawyer. But he did not shift the burden of attorney fees to AT&T.
In re The Chemours Company Sec. Litig.
Publication Date: 2022-03-08 Practice Area: Securities Litigation
Industry: Chemicals and Materials |
Investments and Investment Advisory |
Manufacturing
Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware Judge: District Judge Connolly Attorneys: For plaintiff: Bruce E. Jameson, Marcus E. Montejo, Stephen D. Dargitz, Prickett, Jones & Elliott, P.A., Wilmington, DE, liaison counsel for the class. Mary Sikra Thomas, Bruce E. Jameson Prickett, Jones & Elliott, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Maya S. Saxena, Joseph E. White, III, Lester R. Hooker, Dianne M. Pitre, Saxena White P.A., Boca Raton, FL; Steven B. Singer, Kyla Grant, Saxena White P.A., White Plains, NY; David R. Kaplan, Saxena White P.A., San Diego, CA for lead plaintiff and for the class. For defendant: Joel Friedlander, Jeffrey Gorris, Christopher Foulds, Christopher P. Quinn, Friedlander & Gorris P.A., Wilmington, DE for de-fendant. Case number: D69736
The court held that plaintiff met its pleading requirements when he alleged that defendant made false statements in annual and quarterly reports about maximum remediation liabilities
Simons v. Brookfield Asset Mgmt. Inc.
Publication Date: 2022-02-08 Practice Area: Corporate Governance
Industry: Investments and Investment Advisory |
Manufacturing
Court: Court of Chancery Judge: Chancellor McCormick Attorneys: For plaintiff: Kevin H. Davenport, Samuel L. Closic, Eric J. Juray, Prickett, Jones & Elliott, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Brian J. Robbins, Gregory Del Gaizo, Stephen J. Oddo, Eric M.Carrino, Robbins LLP, San Diego, CA for plaintiff. For defendant: Bradley R. Aronstam, R. Garrett Rice, Ross Aronstam & Moritz LLP, Wilmington, DE; Geoffrey J. Ritts, Jones Day, Cleveland, OH; Marjorie P. Duffy, Jones Day, Columbus, OH; Blake Rohrbacher, Alexander M. Krischik, Andrew L. Milam, Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Lawrence Portnoy, Davis Polk &Wardwell LLP, New York, NY for defendants. Case number: D69705
The court held that a majority of the board at the time of filing were outside directors who did not receive a material personal benefit from the challenged transaction, did not face a substantial likelihood of liability because of an exculpation provision, and did not lack independence from the controlling stockholder who was a party to the challenged transaction.
Equity-League Pension Trust Fund v. Great Hill Partners L.P.
Publication Date: 2021-12-14 Practice Area: Corporate Governance
Industry: E-Commerce |
Investments and Investment Advisory
Court: Court of Chancery Judge: Vice Chancellor Glasscock Attorneys: For plaintiff: Corinne Elise Amato, Kevin H. Davenport, Jason W. Rigby, Prickett, Jones & Elliott, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Eric L. Zagar, Matthew C. Benedict, Kessler Topaz Meltzer & Check, LLP, Radnor, PA; Patrick C. Lynch, Lynch & Pine, Providence, RI, for plaintiff. For defendant: Paul J. Lockwood, Jenness E. Parker, Jacob J. Fedechko, Trevor T. Nielsen, Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom, Wilmington, DE; John L. Reed, Ronald N. Brown, III, Peter H. Kyle, Kelly L. Fruend, DLA Piper LLP (US), Wilmington, DE; Rudolf Koch, Matthew D. Perri, Andrew L. Milam, Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Roberto M. Braceras, Caroline H. Bullerjahn, John A. Barker, Dylan E. Schweers, Goodwin Procter LLP, Boston, MA; Kurt M. Heyman, Gillian L. Andrews, Heyman Enerio Gattuso & Hir-zel, LLP, Wilmington, DE; Brandon F. White, Euripides Dalmanieras, Leah S. Rizkallah, Foley Hoag LLP, Boston, MA for defendants. Case number: D69638
The court held in this derivative suit that demand was not excused where there was no showing that at least five members of a nine-member board of directors were unable to consider a pre-suit demand. Motions to dismiss granted.
Shareholders Say Upholding Chancery Decision Would Destroy Appraisal Rights in DGCL
The shareholders' appeal states it's asking the court to apply Delaware's appraisal statute to determine for the first time whether, for appraisal purposes, a dividend paid after a merger closed can be considered part of the merger, as well as that dividend's effect on appraisal rights.
Law Journal Press | Digital Book
Anatomy of a Merger: Strategies and Techniques for Negotiating Corporate Acquisitions
Authors: James C. Freund
View this Book
View more book results for the query "Prickett, Jones & Elliott, P.A."
Upholding Chancery Decision Would Destroy Appraisal Rights in DGCL, Shareholders Say
The shareholders' appeal states it's asking the court to apply Delaware's appraisal statute to determine for the first time whether, for appraisal purposes, a dividend paid after a merger closed can be considered part of the merger, as well as that dividend's effect on appraisal rights.
Chancery Court Dismisses Wayfair Shareholder Suit Over Plaintiff's Failure to Make Pre-Suit Demand
Vice Chancellor Sam Glasscock III found that the plaintiff did not demonstrate that the defendants acted in bad faith when they approved a debt issuance transaction, giving the defendants cause to dismiss the suit.
Hollywood Firefighters' Pension Fund v. Malone
Publication Date: 2021-11-23 Practice Area: Attorney Compensation
Industry: Investments and Investment Advisory |
Legal Services |
Technology Media and Telecom
Court: Court of Chancery Judge: Vice Chancellor Glasscock Attorneys: For plaintiff: Gregory V. Varallo, Andrew E. Blumberg, Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann LLP, Wilmington, DE; Michael Hanrahan, Kevin H. Davenport, Mary S. Thomas, Prickett, Jones & Elliott, P.A.; Mark Lebovitch, Jacqueline Y. Ma, Daniel E. Meyer, Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann LLP, New York, NY; Lee D. Rudy, Eric L. Zagar, Christopher M. Windover, Matthew C. Benedict, Kessler Topaz Meltzer & Check, LLP, Randor, PA; Robert D.Klausner, Klausner Kaufman Jensen & Levinson, P.A., Plantation, FL; Aaron T. Morris, Morris Kandinov LLP, Stowe, VT for plaintiffs. For defendant: Robert S. Saunders, Joseph O. Larkin, Matthew P. Majarian, Ryan M. Lindsay, Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP, Wilmington, DE; Richard B. Harper, Thomas E. O’Brien, Vern Cassin, Baker Botts LLP, New York, NY; Kenneth J. Nachbar, Megan W. Cascio, Thomas P. Will, Sarah P. Kaboly, Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP, Wilmington, DE; Douglas D. Herrmann, Emily L. Wheatley, Troutman Pepper Hamilton Sanders LLP, Wilmington, DE for defendants. Case number: D69614
The court held that plaintiffs were entitled to a mootness fee in the amount of 9 million dollars.
Boeing Shareholders Float $237.5M Settlement in NY State Comptroller-Led Suit
The agreement would conclude litigation by shareholders who argue Boeing should have had more oversight over the 737 MAX aircrafts that resulted in two mass-casualty crashes.
TRENDING STORIES
More from ALM
- Legal Speak at General Counsel Conference Midwest 2024: Mike Andolina, Partner, White & Case 1 minute read
- Legal Speak at General Counsel Conference Midwest 2024: Carolyn Burbrink, Uber Director of Volume Mobility Safety and Insurance Litigation 1 minute read
- Legal Speak at General Counsel Conference Midwest 2024: Andy Goldberg, Laner Muchin Managing Partner 1 minute read
Resources
Revenue, Profit, Cash: Managing Law Firms for Success
Brought to you by Juris Ledger
Download Now
Law Firm Operational Considerations for the Corporate Transparency Act
Brought to you by Wolters Kluwer
Download Now
The Ultimate Guide to Remote Legal Work
Brought to you by Filevine
Download Now
Practical Guidance Journal: Protecting Work Product in a Generative AI World
Brought to you by LexisNexis®
Download Now