Don’t forget you can visit MyAlerts to manage your alerts at any time.
69 results for '* industry:"Entertainment and Leisure"' You can use Search Constraints to get even better search results
Publication Date: 2019-01-16
Practice Area: Bankruptcy | Deals and Transactions
Industry: Consulting | Entertainment and Leisure
Court: U.S. Bankruptcy Court
Judge: Judge Carey
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: D68426
Litigation trustee was entitled to summary judgment in this fraudulent transfer matter, because the debtor was insolvent at the time of the transaction and no exchange or reasonably equivalent value occurred.
Publication Date: 2018-12-12
Practice Area: Contractual Disputes
Industry: Entertainment and Leisure
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Vice Chancellor Montgomery-Reeves
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Tammy L. Mercer and M. Paige Valeski, Young Conaway Stargatt & Taylor, LLP, Wilmington, DE; Mat-thew L. Larrabee and Benjamin M. Rose, Dechert LLP, New York, NY; Michael S. Doluisio, Dechert LLP, Philadelphia, PA for plaintiff.
for defendant: Raymond J. DiCamillo, Susan M. Hannigan and Sarah T. Andrade, Richards, Layton & Finger P.A., Wil-mington, DE; David B. Tulchin, Brian T. Frawley and Andrew J. Finn, Sullivan & Cromwell, LLP, New York, NY for defendants.
Case Number: D68385
Res judicata and collateral estoppel did not bar a plaintiff's claims for a subsequent breach of contract, but plaintiff failed to demonstrate it was entitled to a preliminary injunction.
Publication Date: 2018-12-05
Practice Area: Entertainment and Sports Law | Telecommunications
Industry: Entertainment and Leisure
Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
Judge: District Judge Noreika
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Charles J. Brown, III of Gellert Scali Busenkell & Brown, LLC, Wilmington, DE for plaintiff.
for defendant: N/A
Case Number: D68377
Plaintiff was entitled to damages against a corporate entity for intercepting a cable transmission, but the court denied judgment against the individual defendants.
Publication Date: 2018-11-07
Practice Area: Labor Law
Industry: Entertainment and Leisure | Retail
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Vice Chancellor Montgomery-Reeves
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Kevin M. Coen, Alexandra M. Cumings, Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP, Wilmington, DE; Sean M. Berkowitz, Matthew W. Walch, Reuben J. Stob, Latham & Watkins LLP, Chicago, IL, attorneys for plaintiff
for defendant: Henry E. Gallagher, Timothy M. Holly, Mary I. Akhimien, Shaun Michael Kelly, Connolly Gallagher LLP, Wilmington, DE; Patrick J. Barrett, Rhianna A. Kittrell, Fraser Stryker PC LLO, Omaha, NE, attorneys for defendants.
Case Number: D68343
Non-compete provision unenforceable against employees under applicable Nebraska law where state's public policy precluded employers' restriction on employees' post-employment use of general skill, but confidentiality and non-solicitation agreements enforceable to protect employer from improper and unfair competition.
Publication Date: 2018-08-22
Practice Area: Bankruptcy
Industry: Entertainment and Leisure
Court: U.S. Bankruptcy Court
Judge: Judge Gross
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: D68259
Bankruptcy court determined that a chapter 11 proceeding should be converted to one under chapter 7, rather than being dismissed.
Law Journal Press | Digital Book
Authors: Patrick S. Montoya, Ervin A. Gonzalez, Ervin A. Gonzalez, Ervin A. Gonzalez, Ervin A. Gonzalez
View this BookView more book results for the query "*"
Publication Date: 2018-07-18
Practice Area: Damages
Industry: Entertainment and Leisure
Court: Delaware Superior Court
Judge: Judge Rocanelli
Attorneys: For plaintiff: William L. O'Day, Woloshin, Lynch & Associates, P.A., attorney for plaintiffs
for defendant: Julie M. Donoghue, Delaware Department of Justice, attorney for defendants.
Case Number: D68216
Complaint seeking damages for lottery's failure to honor winning tickets dismissed on summary judgment where computer malfunction caused same numbers to repeat for multiple consecutive drawings, thereby eliminating the legally required element of chance.
Publication Date: 2018-01-03
Practice Area: Patent Litigation
Industry: Entertainment and Leisure | Technology Media and Telecom
Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
Judge: District Judge Andrews
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Philip A. Rovner, Jonathan A. Choa, Paul J. Andre, Lisa Kobialka, James R. Hannah, Hannah Lee and Aaron M. Frankel for plaintiff
for defendant: Jack B. Blumenfeld, Stephen J. Kraftschik, Michael A. Tomasulo, Gino Cheng, David K. Lin, Joe S. Netikosol, Michael M. Murray, David P. Enzminger, Dan K. Webb and Kathleen B. Barry for defendants.
Case Number: D67993
The court construed various terms in this patent litigation relating to computer technology.
Publication Date: 2017-12-27
Practice Area: Civil Appeals | Regulation
Industry: Entertainment and Leisure
Court: Delaware Supreme Court
Judge: Justice Valihura
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Francis G.X. Pileggi and Alexandra D. Rogin, Eckert Seamans Cherin & Mellott, LLC, Wilmington, DE, attorneys for appellants
for defendant: Ralph K. Durstein and Devera B. Scott, State of Delaware Department of Justice, Dover, DE, attorneys for appellees.
Case Number: D67983
State agencies lacked authority to impose regulations amount to near-total ban on lawful firearms in state parks and forests, where Delaware Constitution protected citizens rights to bear lawful arms both inside and outside the home for the defense of self and family.
Publication Date: 2017-12-13
Practice Area: Personal Injury
Industry: Entertainment and Leisure
Court: Delaware Superior Court
Judge: Judge Johnston
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Bartholomew J. Dalton and Laura J. Simon, Dalton & Associates; Larry E. Coben and Gregory S. Spizer, Anapol Weiss, attorneys for plaintiff
for defendant: Michael J. Logullo, Rawle & Henderson LLP; George T. Lees III, Logan & Petrone, LLC, attorneys for defendants.
Case Number: D67966
Implied primary assumption of risk did not insulate alleged tortfeasor from liability for recklessness, since duty to protect from harm inherent in dangerous activity, eliminated by the primary assumption of risk, was distinct from duty not to increase risk of harm through intentional or reckless conduct.
Publication Date: 2017-10-11
Practice Area: Creditors' and Debtors' Rights
Industry: Entertainment and Leisure
Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
Judge: Judge Stark
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Fredrick B. Rosner, Scott J. Leonhardt, Jason A. Gibson and Jeffrey A. Wurst for plaintiffs
for defendant: Robert D. Goldberg and Deborah A. Vitale for defendant
Case Number: D67898
Plaintiffs amended complaint properly alleged diversity of citizenship with regard to individual plaintiffs, but the court was not entitled to rely on statements in declarations to support the diversity argument with regard to an unincorporated association and the holder of a debenture instrument. Motion to dismiss granted in part, denied in part.
Legal Speak is a weekly podcast that makes sense of what’s happening in the legal industry.
1 minute read