Filter This View

  • Freeman v. Qualizza

    Publication Date: 2022-08-30
    Practice Area: Corporate Governance
    Industry: Financial Services and Banking
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Vice Chancellor Fioravanti
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: James D. Taylor, Jr., Aubrey J. Morin, Saul Ewing Arnstein & Lehr LLP, Wilmington, DE; Gregory J. Scandaglia, William J. Ryan, Joseph R. Swee, Scandaglia Ryan LLP, Chicago, IL for plaintiff.
    for defendant: Douglas D. Herrmann, Emily L. Wheatley, Troutman Pepper Hamilton Sanders LLP, Wilmington, DE; Mark H. Horwitch, Daniel L. Stanner, Tabet Divito & Rothstein LLC, Chicago, IL for defendant.
    Case Number: D69934

    LLC manager could execute written consent directing the removal and replacement of manager of another LLC, where the first LLC's sole asset was ownership of the other LLC and thus the first LLC manager validly acted unilaterally in the management of daily operations.

  • In Re Morrow Park Holding LLC

    Publication Date: 2022-08-30
    Practice Area: Contracts
    Industry: Real Estate
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Vice Chancellor Fiorvanti
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Brian E. Farnan, Michael J. Farnan, Farnan LLP, Wilmington DE for plaintiffs.
    for defendant: Richard P. Rollo, Travis S. Hunter, Angela Lam, Nicole M. Henry, John T. Miraglia, Richards, Layton, & Finger, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Alan S. Loewinsohn, Kerry Schonwald, Loewinsohn, Deary, Simony Ray LLP, Dallas, TX for defendants.
    Case Number: D69935

    Court denied breach of contract claim in real estate development dissolution case holding that plaintiffs failed to establish that defendants breached material terms of the agreement, their actions were unreasonable, or but for defendants' actions, the plaintiffs would be in a different position.

  • Paul Capital Advisors, LLC v. Stahl

    Publication Date: 2022-08-30
    Practice Area: Trusts and Estates
    Industry: Investments and Investment Advisory
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Vice Chancellor Glasscock
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: David E. Ross, Eric D. Selden, A. Gage Whirley, Ross Aronstam & Moritz, LLP, Wilmington, DE; John F. Hartmann, P.C., Ravi Subramanian Shankar, Kirkland & Ellis LLP, Chicago, IL for plaintiffs.
    for defendant: Stephen C. Norman, Ellis H. Huff, Potter Anderson & Corroon LLP, Wilmington, DE; Norman M. Powell, Emily V. Burton, Lauren Dunkle Fortunato, Michael E. Neminski, Nehama L. Hanoch, Young Conaway Stargatt & Taylor, LLP, Wilmington, DE; Brett M. McCartney, Elizabeth A. Powers, Sarah T. Andrade, Bayard, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Michael K. Hurst, Sara H. Chelette, Lynn Pinker Hurst & Schwegmann, Dallas, TX for defendants.
    Case Number: D69936

    Sophisticated transactional arrangement did not list plaintiffs as beneficiaries or holders of beneficial interest in certain exchange trusts, therefore causing plaintiffs to lack standing to seek removal of the trust advisor of the exchange trusts.

  • HUMC Holdco, LLC v. MPT of Hoboken TRS, LLC

    Publication Date: 2022-08-16
    Practice Area: Corporate Governance
    Industry: Health Care | Investments and Investment Advisory
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Chancellor McCormick
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Michael Busenkell, Margaret F. England, Bradley P. Lehman, Gellert Scali Busenkell & Brown LLC, Wilmington, DE for plaintiffs.
    for defendant: Patricia L. Enerio, Jamie L. Brown, Heyman Enerio Gattuso & Hirzel LLP, Wilmington, DE; Christopher J. Sullivan, Nutter, McClennan & Fish LLP, New York, NY; Thomas A. Uebler, Joseph Christensen, McCollom D’Emilio Smith Uebler LLC, Wilmington, DE for defendants.
    Case Number: D69919

    Laches barred contract, fraud, and waste claims arising from the payment of management fees where rejection of claimant's request for books/records/information meant that it could no longer be "blamelessly ignorant" of any alleged wrongdoing and therefore the running of the limitations period was triggered.

  • City Pension Fund for Firefighters & Police Officers in the City of Miami v. The Trade Desk, Inc.

    Publication Date: 2022-08-16
    Practice Area: Corporate Governance
    Industry: Investments and Investment Advisory
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Vice Chancellor Fioravanti
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Gregory V. Varallo, Andrew E. Blumberg, Daniel E. Meyer, Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann LLP, Wilmington, DE; Mark Lebovitch, Reuben Gottlieb, Jeroen van Kwawegen, Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann LLP, New York, NY; Jeremy Friedman, David Tejtel, Julie Palley, Friedman Oster & Tejtel PLLC, Bedford Hills, NY for plaintiff.
    for defendant: William M. Lafferty, Ryan D. Stottmann, Sabrina Hendershot, Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP, Wilmington, DE; Peter J. Walsh, Jr., Jacqueline A. Rogers, Abraham C. Schneider, Potter Anderson & Corroon LLP, Wilmington, DE; Matthew Rawlinson, Latham & Watkins LLP, Menlo Park, CA; Colleen Smith, Latham & Watkins LLP, San Diego, CA; Kristin Murphy, Latham & Watkins LLP, Costa Mesa, CA; Brad D. Sorrels, Shannon E. German, Benjamin M. Potts, Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati, P.C., Wilmington, DE; David J. Berger, Steven M. Guggenheim, Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati, P.C., Palo Alto, CA; S. Toni Wormald, Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati, P.C., San Francisco, CA for defendants.
    Case Number: D69918

    Interested transaction benefitting controlling stockholder was subject to business judgment review under MFW framework where special committee had a majority of disinterested directors and proxy adequately disclosed the controller's motivation for proposing the transaction.

  • Law Journal Press | Digital Book

    California Premises Liability Law

    Authors: Jayme C. Long

    View this Book

    View more book results for the query "*"

  • Steward Health Care Sys, LLC v. Tenet Bus. Serv. Corp.

    Publication Date: 2022-08-16
    Practice Area: Contracts
    Industry: Health Care
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Vice Chancellor Glasscock
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Michael A. Barlow and Adam K. Schulman, Abrams & Bayliss LLP, Wilmington, DE; Anthony Bongiorno and Jessica Reese, Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP, Boston, MA; Rollo C. Baker IV, Jared Ruocco, and Eric White, Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP, New York, NY for plaintiffs.
    for defendant: Lewis H. Lazarus, K. Tyler O’Connell, Albert J. Carroll, and Barnaby Grzaslewicz, Morris James LLP, Wilmington, DE; Stephen C. Hackney, P.C., Timothy W. Knapp, P.C., and Brendan E. Ryan, Kirkland & Ellis LLP, Chicago, IL for defendants.
    Case Number: D69921

    In lieu of a demonstration of likelihood of success on the merits, court granted preliminary injunctive relief compelling specific performance, conditioned on plaintiffs' posting of a bond sufficient to cover the service fees defendants were owed under the parties contract.

  • In re Morrow Park Holding LLC

    Publication Date: 2022-08-16
    Practice Area: Corporate Entities
    Industry: Real Estate
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Vice Chancellor Fioravanti
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Brian E. Farnan, Michael J. Farnan, Farnan LLP, Wilmington, DE for plaintiffs.
    for defendant: Richard P. Rollo, Travis S. Hunter, Angela Lam, Nicole M. Henry, John T. Miraglia, Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Alan S. Loewinsohn, Kerry Schonwald, Loewinsohn Deary Simon Ray LLP, Dallas, TX for defendants.
    Case Number: D69920

    Although both parties had breached their business divorce agreements, plaintiffs had failed to demonstrate their entitlement to damages where plaintiffs' own conduct meant that defendants' breach was not the cause of plaintiffs' alleged loss.

  • Parks v. Horizon Holdings, LLC

    Publication Date: 2022-08-02
    Practice Area: Contracts
    Industry: Investments and Investment Advisory
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Vice Chancellor Glasscock
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Thomas V. Ayala, Sally E. Veghte, Klehr Harrison Harvey Branzburg LLP, Wilmington, DE for plaintiffs.
    for defendant: Scott B. Czerwonka, Andrea S. Brooks, Wilks Law, LLC, Wilmington, DE for defendants.
    Case Number: D69902

    Restrictive covenants in agreements governing asset purchase transaction for the sale of a business were governed by Delaware law where the parties had contractually chosen Delaware and where parties challenging the enforceability of the covenants failed to show that their home state's law would apply in the absence of the contractual choice.

  • Lentz v. Mathias

    Publication Date: 2022-07-26
    Practice Area: Securities Litigation
    Industry: Construction | Investments and Investment Advisory | Transportation
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Vice Chancellor Laster
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Andrew W. Lentz, plaintiff pro se
    for defendant: Shah Mathias, defendant pro se; Debra Mathias, defendant pro se; Robert Choiniere, defendant pro se; Bryan Elicker, defendant pro se; Robert Todd Reynold, defendant pro se; James Becker, defendant pro se; Steve Trout, defendant pro se; John W. Thompson, defendant pro se; Shahjahan C. Mathias, defendant pro se; Donald E. Williams, Jr., defendant pro se; Keith Doyle, defendant pro se; Suhail Matthias, defendant pro se; James Kingsborough, defendant pro se; Joseph Silbaugh, defendant pro se; Kevin Eisenhart, defendant pro se; Kurt Bauer, defendant pro se.
    Case Number: D69894

    Court issued temporary injunction barring tender offer after finding that controllers provided misleading and false disclosures in connection with the offer and had made coercive threats to induce non-tendering stockholders to tender.

  • Weinberg v. Waystar, Inc.

    Publication Date: 2022-07-19
    Practice Area: Contractual Disputes
    Industry: Software
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Vice Chancellor Glasscock
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Steven P. Wood, Andrew S. Dupre, Travis J. Ferguson, McCarter & English, LLP, Wilmington, DE; Julie B. Porter, Salvatore Prescott Porter & Porter, Evanston, IL for plaintiff.
    for defendant: Kevin M. Gallagher, Caroline M. McDonough, Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Sarah A. Zielinski, Amy Starinieri Gilbert, McGuireWoods LLP, Chicago, IL for defendants.
    Case Number: D69886

    Option grant was interpreted to grant employer the right to call exercised options following the employee's termination or following the employee's breach of their restrictive covenants; both events were not required to have occurred for the right to be available.