The Delaware Court of Chancery on Friday rejected a “novel theory” to expand the state’s narrow doctrine allowing some claims to be treated as both derivative and direct. The rejection comes in a decision that nixed an investor lawsuit seeking to undue the $124 million merger of Herman Miller Inc. and Design Within Reach Inc.

The post-trial ruling from Chancellor Andre G. Bouchard rebuffed one set of claims from former DWR stockholders Charles Almond and Andrew Franklin, who alleged in a 2014 lawsuit that a series of technical flaws had prevented the merger of two of the biggest names in the modern furniture industry from taking effect.

This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.

To view this content, please continue to their sites.

Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]