Don’t forget you can visit MyAlerts to manage your alerts at any time.
2,431 results for '* court:"COURT OF DELAWARE"' You can use Search Constraints to get even better search results
Publication Date: 2024-05-06
Practice Area: Labor Law
Industry:
Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
Judge: District Judge Andrews
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Trina M. Stanford, Wilmington, DE, pro se plaintiff.
for defendant:
Case Number: 23-663-RGA
Court sua sponte dismissed employment discrimination claims due to insufficient allegations regarding employment status and exhaustion of administrative remedies.
Publication Date: 2024-05-06
Practice Area: Civil Rights
Industry:
Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
Judge: District Judge Andrews
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Sharon M. James, Wilmington, DE, pro se plaintiff.
for defendant:
Case Number: 23-914-RGA
Court sua sponte dismissed civil rights complaint upon screening where defendants were entitled to judicial immunity and plaintiff's allegations did not fall within the scope of a recognized Bivens claim.
Publication Date: 2024-04-29
Practice Area: Antitrust
Industry: E-Commerce | Manufacturing
Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
Judge: District Judge Andrews
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Matthew D. Stachel, Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP, Wilmington, DE; William A. Isaacson, Amy J. Mauser, David E. Cole, Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP, Washington, D.C. for plaintiff.
for defendant: David J. Baldwin, Peter C. McGivney, Berger Harris, Wilmington, DE; Joseph A. Ostoyich, Danielle Morello, Clifford Chance LLP, Washington, D.C.; Paul C. Cuomo, Heather Souder Choi, Adam Dec, Baker Botts LLP, Washington, D.C. for defendants.
Case Number: 15-108-RGA
Sherman Act violation claim failed under the rule of reason where plaintiff failed to present sufficient evidence to define the relevant geographic or product market, but removal of plaintiff's products from a website, which hampered its ability to compete, was sufficient evidence of refusal to deal.
Publication Date: 2024-04-29
Practice Area: Damages
Industry: E-Commerce | Technology Media and Telecom
Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
Judge: District Judge Connolly
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Robert Charles Lewis, Salem, NJ, pro se plaintiff.
for defendant:
Case Number: 23-785-CFC
Court dismissed purported complaint for royalties due to insufficient allegations regarding any agreement for royalty payments or sales that would trigger a royalty obligation.
Publication Date: 2024-04-29
Practice Area: Criminal Law
Industry:
Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
Judge: District Judge Noreika
Attorneys: For plaintiff: David C. Weiss, Special Counsel, Leo J. Wise, Principal Senior Assistant Special Counsel, Derek E. Hines, Senior Assistant Special Counsel, U.S. Department of Justice, Wilmington, DE for plaintiff.
for defendant: Bartholomew J. Dalton, Dalton & Associates, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Abbe David Lowell, Christopher D. Man, Winston & Strawn, Washington, DC for defendant.
Case Number: 23-61 (MN)
Court declined to dismiss charges based on immunity purportedly conferred by a diversion agreement since the agreement lacked the approval necessary for it to go into effect and the parties and court disputed the scope of immunity.
Law Journal Press | Digital Book
Authors:
View this BookView more book results for the query "*"
Publication Date: 2024-04-22
Practice Area: Securities Litigation
Industry: Retail
Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
Judge: District Judge Connolly
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Brian E. Farnan, Michael J. Farnan, Farnan LLP, Wilmington, DE; Sara Fuks, The Rosen Law Firm, P.A., New York, NY for plaintiffs.
for defendant: Robert W. Whetzel, Raymond J. DiCamillo, John M. O'Toole, Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Sean M. Berkowitz, Nicholas J. Siciliano, Latham & Watkins LLP, Chicago, IL for defendants.
Case Number: 21-55-CFC
Stockholders failed to adequately plead that securities filings were materially false or misleading where statements adequately conveyed that the company was subject to investigations and securities laws did not require corporations to guess as to the likely outcome of such investigations.
Publication Date: 2024-04-22
Practice Area: Copyrights
Industry: Consulting | Software | Technology Media and Telecom
Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
Judge: District Judge Bryson
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 23-325-WCB
Court denied renewed motion for stay pending resolution of interlocutory appeal in related criminal matter where no unexpected events had occurred in that matter and the scope of the limited stay would mean the defendants in the criminal matter would remain unavailable to testify due to their Fifth Amendment privilege.
Publication Date: 2024-04-22
Practice Area: Personal Injury
Industry: Technology Media and Telecom
Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
Judge: District Judge Noreika
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Lottoria N. Brown, Wilmington, DE, pro se plaintiff.
for defendant:
Case Number: 22-1298 (MN)
Court dismissed complaint upon sua sponte screening after finding that generic allegations failed to state a prima facie claim.
Publication Date: 2024-04-15
Practice Area: Labor Law
Industry: Manufacturing
Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
Judge: District Judge Fallon
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Thomas S. Neuberger, Stephen J. Neuberger, The Neuberger Firm, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Timothy P. Rumberger, Law Offices of Timothy P. Rumberger, Alameda, CA for plaintiffs.
for defendant: Samuel L. Moultrie, Renee Mosley Delcollo, Greenberg Traurig, LLP, Wilmington, DE; Justin K. Victor, Greenberg Traurig, LLP, Atlanta, GA for defendants.
Case Number: 22-1582-SRF
Court dismissed Fair Labor Standards Act claims to the extent they sought overtime "gap time" pay where the statute did not expressly provide relief for such pay.
Publication Date: 2024-04-15
Practice Area: Contractual Disputes
Industry: Health Care
Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
Judge: District Judge Noreika
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Andrew L. Cole, Stacy L. Newman, Jack M. Dougherty, Cole Schotz P.C., Wilmington, DE; Ryan J. Morley, John W. Hofstetter, Littler Mendelson, P.C., Cleveland, OH for plaintiffs.
for defendant: Daniel C. Herr, Law Office of Daniel C. Herr, LLC, Wilmington, DE; David E. Rothstein, Rothstein Law Firm, PA, Greenville, SC for defendant.
Case Number: 22-319 (MN)
Although court found most of former employee's restrictive covenants enforceable as reasonably tailored to protect employer's legitimate economic interests, it granted employee judgment where former employer failed to present evidence at trial proving that employee breached any enforceable covenant.
Legal Speak is a weekly podcast that makes sense of what’s happening in the legal industry.
1 minute read