Mackenzie Wrobel of Duane Morris (Photo: Courtesy Photo) Chancery Enforces Rule 15(aaa) in Its Fight Against Serial Amendments to Pleadings
To amend, or not to amend? That may not be "the question" posed in William Shakespeare's "Hamlet," but it is "the question" a plaintiff should ask itself upon receiving, and before responding to, a motion from the defendant to dismiss a complaint.
April 07, 2021 at 09:00 AM
11 minute read
To amend, or not to amend? That may not be "the question" posed in William Shakespeare's "Hamlet," but it is "the question" a plaintiff should ask itself upon receiving, and before responding to, a motion from the defendant to dismiss a complaint. A recent letter opinion from the desk of Vice Chancellor Glasscock in In re USG Corporation Stockholder Litigation, No. 2018-0602-SG (Del. Ch. March 11, 2021) (the Letter Opinion) reminds Delaware litigants about the importance of thinking through that question and the potential consequences of an imprudent answer.
Background
Vice Chancellor Sam Glasscock issued his Letter Opinion in response to the plaintiffs motion for leave to file a second amended class action complaint (the motion), which, in the court's words, came to it "in oddly circuitous fashion." Circuitous is an apt description for the lead up to the Motion, which took center stage after two years of civil litigation.
This content has been archived.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
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All
Chancery: Common Stock Worthless in 'Jacobson v. Akademos' and Transaction Was Entirely Fair
5 minute read
The Importance of Contractual Language in Analyzing Post-Closing Earnout Disputes
6 minute read
Delaware Supreme Court Upholds Court of Chancery’s Refusal to Blue Pencil an Unreasonable Covenant Not to Compete
4 minute read
Chancery Stays Action Pending Resolution of a Motion to Dismiss in a First-Filed Action to Which the Defendant Is Not a Party
5 minute readLaw Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1Is It Time for Large UK Law Firms to Begin Taking Private Equity Investment?
- 2Federal Judge Pauses Trump Funding Freeze as Democratic AGs Launch Defensive Measure
- 3Class Action Litigator Tapped to Lead Shook, Hardy & Bacon's Houston Office
- 4Arizona Supreme Court Presses Pause on KPMG's Bid to Deliver Legal Services
- 5Bill Would Consolidate Antitrust Enforcement Under DOJ
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250
