Barry M Klayman

December 06, 2017 | Delaware Business Court Insider

What should be the standard of review when the Court of Chancery considers an appeal from a receiver's disallowance of a claim pursuant to section 296(b) of the Delaware General Corporation Law? In B.E. Capital Management Fund LP v. Fund.com Inc., C.A. No. 12843-VCL (Del. Ch. Oct. 4, 2017), Vice Chancellor Laster held that a receiver's determination is subject to de novo review and the court has discretion to go beyond the record presented to the receiver by conducting an evidentiary hearing.

By Barry M. Klayman and Mark E. Felger

13 minute read

November 08, 2017 | Delaware Business Court Insider

In a significant decision in a closely watched case, Bankruptcy Judge Laurie Selber Silverstein held in In re Millennium Lab Holdings II, Case No. 15-12284 (LSS) (Del. Bankr. Oct. 3, 2017), that the bankruptcy court had constitutional adjudicatory authority to approve the nonconsensual release of nondebtor, direct nonbankruptcy common law claims against third parties as part of a confirmation order.

By Barry M. Klayman and Mark E. Felger

7 minute read

October 11, 2017 | Delaware Business Court Insider

Can a party be precluded from offering evidence that contradicts or seeks to expand the testimony of its designated Rule 30(b)(6) witness? When a party notices the deposition of an organization under Rule 30(b)(6), the organization has an obligation to ensure, through the testimony of one or more witnesses, that the party taking the deposition receives complete responses, based on the organization's full knowledge and any relevant material available to it.

By Barry M. Klayman and Mark E. Felger

12 minute read

September 07, 2017 | Delaware Business Court Insider

In a case characterized as a "matter of great local interest," Bankruptcy Judge Kevin Gross determined a question of much wider interest to practitioners: whether a contract was void ab initio because the Delaware limited liability company that executed it had not yet been formed.

By Barry M. Klayman and Mark E. Felger

5 minute read

August 09, 2017 | Delaware Business Court Insider

In order for a creditor who supplies goods to a debtor within 20 days before the bankruptcy petition is filed to recover the value of the goods as a priority administrative expense under Section 503(b)(9) of the Bankruptcy Code, the debtor must have had physical possession of the goods and not merely constructive receipt.

By Barry M. Klayman and Mark E. Felger

6 minute read

July 05, 2017 | Delaware Business Court Insider

A divided Delaware Supreme Court recently held that a mortgage assignee must be entitled to enforce the underlying obligation that the mortgage secures in order to foreclose on the mortgage.

By Barry M. Klayman and Mark E. Felger

7 minute read

June 07, 2017 | Delaware Business Court Insider

The Delaware Superior Court has ruled on an issue over an allegedly defamatory article that caused injury to a Delaware corporation hosted on a website outside of Delaware.

By Barry M. Klayman and Mark E. Felger

6 minute read

May 10, 2017 | Delaware Business Court Insider

In a recent opinion, U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Christopher Sontchi of the District of Delaware addressed the interesting issue of the applicability and scope of the sovereign immunity of Indian tribes in the context of preference actions brought by a Chapter 11 trustee.

By Barry M. Klayman and Mark E. Felger

13 minute read

April 04, 2017 | Delaware Business Court Insider

In a rare case involving resort to a Delaware statute's legislative history, Vice Chancellor J. Travis Laster held that Delaware's anti-SLAPP statute is to be construed narrowly so as to be applicable only to public petition and participation in land use proceedings, and is not a broad legal protection against defamation claims.

By Barry M. Klayman and Mark E. Felger

14 minute read

March 29, 2017 | Delaware Business Court Insider

U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Christopher S. Sontchi has held that absent specific language in a debtor-in-possession financing order, a carve-out for a fixed dollar amount for professional fees does not serve as a cap on the amount of fees to which a professional may be entitled.

By Barry M. Klayman and Mark E. Felger

13 minute read