Don’t forget you can visit MyAlerts to manage your alerts at any time.
132 results for '* industry:"Legal Services"' You can use Search Constraints to get even better search results
Publication Date: 2022-08-09
Practice Area: Criminal Law
Industry: Legal Services
Court: Delaware Superior Court
Judge: Judge Karsnitz
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Matthew C. Bloom, Caroline Brittingham, Nichole Gannett, Deputy Attorneys General, Delaware Department of Justice, Georgetown, DE for plaintiff.
for defendant: Patrick J. Collins, Wilmington, DE for defendant.
Case Number: D69916
Trial counsel did not render ineffective assistance where credible testimony showed that they had a nuanced discussion with defendant about the demographic makeup of juries in the county and did not, as defendant claimed, assert that he would not receive a fair trial due to his race.
Publication Date: 2022-07-26
Practice Area: Labor Law
Industry: Legal Services
Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
Judge: District Judge Noreika
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Alice T. Swiderski, Newark, DE, pro se plaintiff.
for defendant: Samuel J. Frabizzio, Wilmington, DE for defendant.
Case Number: D69898
Service on law office was not proper where process server left papers with office secretary, without identifying himself or the nature of the papers, and the secretary was not authorized to accept service of process.
Publication Date: 2022-07-05
Practice Area: Criminal Law
Industry: Legal Services
Court: Delaware Superior Court
Judge: Judge Davis
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Matthew B. Frawley, Deputy Attorney General, Department of Justice, Wilmington, DE for plaintiff.
for defendant: Joshua Chattin, DE, pro se defendant.
Case Number: D69877
Postconviction motion dismissed as untimely where alleged newly discovered evidence was either known to defendant at the time of conviction or was not relevant to the trial proceedings.
Publication Date: 2022-05-10
Practice Area: Antitrust
Industry: Legal Services | Technology Media and Telecom
Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
Judge: District Judge Stark
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Jack B. Blumenfeld, Michael J. Flynn, Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP, Wilmington, DE; Dale M. Cendali, Joshua L. Simmons, Eric A. Loverro, Kirkland & Ellis LLP, New York, NY; Daniel E. Laytin, Christa C. Cottrell, Alyssa C. Kalisky, Cameron D. Ginder, Kirkland & Ellis LLP, Chicago, IL for plaintiffs.
for defendant: David E. Moore, Potter Anderson & Corroon LLP, Wilmington, DE; Gabriel M. Ramsey, Warrington Parker, Jacob Canter, Crowell & Moring LLP, San Francisco, CA; Mark A. Klapow, Lisa Kimmel, Crowell & Moring LLP, Washington, DC for defendant.
Case Number: D69812
Tying claims under the Sherman Act and state unfair competition statutes permitted to proceed where there was sufficient evidence that bundled products did constitute separate products serving separate markets and where unilateral action was sufficient to support a restraint of trade claim.
Publication Date: 2022-05-03
Practice Area: Civil Appeals
Industry: Construction | Legal Services
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Judge: Judge Phipps
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: D69803
The court found that defendants' notice of appeal was premature and that the later order that set the amount of sanctions was the order that should have been the basis for appeal.
Law Journal Press | Digital Book
Authors: Michael R. Griffinger, Paul F. Cullum III
View this BookView more book results for the query "*"
Publication Date: 2022-04-19
Practice Area: Business Torts
Industry: Legal Services
Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
Judge: District Judge Bibas
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Brian E. Farnan, Michael J. Farnan, Farnan LLP, Wilmington, DE; Kristina D. McKenna, Sheryl Koval Garko, Ryan C. Wooten, Shayan Said, Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP, Boston, MA, Houston, TX, San Francisco, CA for plaintiff.
for defendant: Jonathan A. Choa, Daniel Rusk, Potter Anderson & Corroon, LLP, Wilmington, DE; Eric M. Fishman, Jay. D. Dealy, Max. A. Winograd, Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP, New York, NY for defendant.
Case Number: D69787
The court held the claim under the Lanham Act was governed by F.R.C.P. 9 that required the plaintiff to plead fraud with heightened specificity.
Publication Date: 2022-04-05
Practice Area: Bankruptcy
Industry: Legal Services | Real Estate
Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
Judge: District Judge Connolly
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: D69771
Bankruptcy court did not err in issuing a contempt order based on appellant's failure to comply with an order for the disgorgement of fees, where the bankruptcy court had not impermissibly expanded the scope or nature of appellant's status as a fictitious entity, as appellant had previously represented itself as one.
Publication Date: 2022-03-29
Practice Area: Corporate Governance
Industry: Legal Services | Technology Media and Telecom
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Chancellor McCormick
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Frank E. Noyes, II, Offit Kurman, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Douglas Capuder, Capuder Fazio Giacoia LLP, New York, NY for plaintiff.
for defendant: David E. Ross, Bradley R. Aronstam, Eric D. Selden, S. Michael Sirkin, Adam D. Gold, Benjamin Z. Grossberg, Ross Aronstam & Moritz LLP, Wilmington, DE; for defendants.
Case Number: D69759
The court held that subject matter jurisdiction could be exercised by Chancery Court because the order giving authority to the custodian was issued by Chancery Court. Further, the court held that plaintiff failed to state a claim upon relief could be granted. Plaintiff's motion to dismiss denied; defendant's motion to dismiss granted.
Publication Date: 2021-12-28
Practice Area: Contracts
Industry: Entertainment and Leisure | Legal Services
Court: Delaware Superior Court
Judge: Judge Wallace
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Theodore A. Kittila, James G. MacMillan, III, Halloran Farkas + Kittila LLP, Wilmington, DE; Eric M. George, Kim S. Zeldin, Browne George Ross LLP, Los Angeles CA for plaintiffs.
for defendant: Robert K. Beste, Jason Z. Miller, Smith, Katzenstein & Jenkins LLP, Wilmington, DE; Marvin S. Putnam, Jessica Stebbins Bina, R. Peter Durning, Jr., Latham & Watkins LLP, Los Angeles, CA for defendants.
Case Number: D69659
Motion of law firm to intervene to attach an attorney's lien for a judgment for unpaid legal fees denied where firm's right to attach the lien was contractually limited only to causes of actions that were the subject of the engagement agreement, and the firm sought to intervene in a completely unrelated legal action.
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.
Legal Speak is a weekly podcast that makes sense of what’s happening in the legal industry.
1 minute read