Jennifer H Rearden

May 15, 2019 | Delaware Business Court Insider

In 'Verition Partners Master Fund v. Aruba Networks,' the Delaware Supreme Court considered whether the Delaware Court of Chancery abused its discretion in concluding that, as of the “effective date” of the merger between Aruba Networks Inc. and Hewlett-Packard Co., the “fair value” of Aruba was its unaffected market price.

By Jennifer H. Rearden, Jefferson E. Bell and Mark H. Mixon Jr.

7 minute read

June 13, 2018 | Delaware Business Court Insider

In Steinberg v. Bearden, the Delaware Chancery Court considered whether the Aronson or Rales test for demand futility should apply to a derivative claim for breach of fiduciary duty against directors who allegedly made false and misleading statements.

By Jennifer H. Rearden, Jefferson E. Bell and Michael Marron

1 minute read

May 16, 2017 | Delaware Business Court Insider

In a recent decision, the Delaware Supreme Court considered the "fundamental question" of whether "Delaware courts are required to treat insurance contracts that are part of a broad insurance program as legal documents with meaning that varies substantially based on where each claim happens to arise."

By Jennifer H. Rearden, Jefferson E. Bell and Michael Marron

12 minute read

September 01, 2016 | New York Law Journal

Jennifer H. Rearden and Sharon I. Grysman explore the decision in 'Stock v. Schnader Harrison', that communications among "attorneys who have sought the advice of their law firm's in-house general counsel on their ethical obligations in representing a firm client" during the representation of that client are "not subject to disclosure"—even where "the consultation at issue...might have extended to whether [the firm]...was potentially liable...for malpractice."

By Jennifer H. Rearden and Sharon I. Grysman

18 minute read

May 25, 2016 | Delaware Business Court Insider

In Hyatt v. Al-Jazeera America Holdings II, the Delaware Court of Chancery considered the extent to which a dispute must relate to an officer or director's corporate duties before advancement of costs is triggered.

By Jennifer H. Rearden, Jefferson E. Bell and Michael Marron

14 minute read

May 20, 2015 | Delaware Business Court Insider

In Calma v. Templeton, the Delaware Court of Chancery analyzed whether stockholder approval of a general "compensation plan subjects the self-interested payment of compensation to non-employee directors under such a plan to judicial review under a waste standard instead of an entire fairness standard."

By Jennifer H. Rearden, Jefferson E. Bell and Michael Marron

6 minute read

May 20, 2015 | Delaware Business Court Insider

In the Delaware Court of Chancery analyzed whether stockholder approval of a general "compensation plan subjects the self-interested payment of compensation to non-employee directors under such a plan to judicial review under a waste standard instead of an entire fairness standard."

By Jennifer H. Rearden, Jefferson E. Bell and Michael Marron

6 minute read

September 26, 2014 | New York Law Journal

Jennifer H. Rearden and Seema Gupta write that although the new Commercial Division discovery rule expresses a preference for categorical privilege logs, it provides little insight into the form those logs should take. This issue likely will be addressed by courts in the coming months and years. In the meantime, judicial interpretations of similar rules in other jurisdictions may be instructive.

By Jennifer H. Rearden and Seema Gupta

10 minute read

September 22, 2014 | Commercial Litigation Insider

Jennifer Rearden and Seema Gupta of Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher write: Although a new Commercial Division rule expresses a preference for categorical privilege logs, it provides little insight into the form those logs should take. This issue likely will be addressed by courts in the coming months and years.

By Jennifer H. Rearden and Seema Gupta

11 minute read

September 08, 2014 | Commercial Litigation Insider

Jennifer Rearden and Sharon Grysman of Gibson Dunn write for CLI: This fall, New York's highest court will review a Fourth Department decision reaffirming a controversial precedent that essentially neutralized real time assistance by counsel to nonparty deponents during the course of depositions.

By Jennifer H. Rearden and Sharon I. Grysman

12 minute read