• Infomedia Group, Inc. v. Orange Health Solutions, Inc.

    Publication Date: 2020-08-19
    Practice Area: Contracts
    Industry: Call Centers | Health Care | Software
    Court: Delaware Superior Court
    Judge: Judge LeGrow
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Daniel J. Brown and Hayley J. Reese, McCarter & English, LLP, Wilmington, DE for plaintiff.
    for defendant: Daniel B. Rath, Rebecca L. Butcher, and Nicolas E. Jenner, Landis Rath& Cobb, LLP, Wilmington, DE; Alan S. Wachs, Smith, Gambrell & Russell, LLP, Jacksonville, FL; Donald H. Chase, Morrison Cohen LLP, New York, NY for defendants.

    Case Number: D69087

    Fraudulent misrepresentation claims failed due to anti-reliance provision in asset purchase agreement where sophisticated parties expressly limited representations and reliance to written notice of customer terminations.

  • Bradford v. Beebe Med. Ctr.

    Publication Date: 2020-06-24
    Practice Area: Medical Malpractice
    Industry: Health Care
    Court: Delaware Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Karsnitz
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Thomas Michael Bradford, Washington, DC, pro se plaintiff
    for defendant: Bradley J. Goewert and Catherine M. Cramer, Marshall Dennehey Warner Coleman & Goggin, Wilmington, DE for defendant Beebe Medical Center. John D. Balaguer and Roopa Sabesan, White and Williams LLP, Wilmington, DE for defendants Haldar and Cathcart.

    Case Number: D69023

    Defendant hospital dismissed from medical malpractice action where complaint was filed outside statute of limitations and plaintiff's notice of investigation to extend limitations window failed to identify hospital as a potential defendant.

  • First State Orthopaedics v. Employers Ins. Co. of Wausau

    Publication Date: 2020-05-27
    Practice Area: Insurance Law
    Industry: Health Care | Insurance
    Court: Delaware Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Karsnitz
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: John S. Spandaro, John Sheehan Spadaro, LLC, Smyrna, DE for plaintiff.
    for defendant: Kevin J. Connors, Marshall Dennehey Warner Coleman & Goggin, Wilmington, DE; D. Andrew Hatchett, Tiffany Powers and Robert Poole, Alston & Bird, Atlanta, GA for defendants.

    Case Number: D68994

    Defendants' voluntary cessation of a business practice did not cause the parties' controversy to become moot, because defendants left open the possibility of returning to that practice in the future.

  • Gala v. Delaware Bd. of Med. Licensure &Discipline

    Publication Date: 2020-05-20
    Practice Area: Regulation
    Industry: Health Care
    Court: Delaware Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Karsnitz
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Benjamin A. Schwartz and Gwendolyn Osborn-Gustavson, Schwartz & Schwartz, Attorneys at Law, P.A., Dover, DE for appellant.
    for defendant: Patricia A. Davis, Delaware Deputy State Solicitor, Dover, DE for appellee.

    Case Number: D68984

    Medical board did not err in revoking doctor's license where it expressly declined to rely on improper factual findings by hearing officer and where sufficient evidence existed to support finding that doctor engaged in inappropriate sexual relationship with a patient in exchange for opioid prescriptions.

  • Anderson v. GI Assocs. of Delaware, P.A.

    Publication Date: 2020-05-13
    Practice Area: Medical Malpractice
    Industry: Health Care
    Court: Delaware Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Rocanelli
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Timothy E. Lengkeek, Young, Conaway, Stargatt & Taylor, LLP, Wilmington, DE for plaintiffs.
    for defendant: Bradley J. Goewert and Lorenza A. Wolhar, Marshall, Dennehey, Warner, Coleman & Goggin, Wilmington, DE for defendants.

    Case Number: D68975

    Act of negligent treatment and resulting injury occurring on two separate dates meant that medical malpractice case involved continuum of treatment, requiring that the statute of limitations be measured from the last act in the continuum of treatment.

  • Lopez v. Bamaca

    Publication Date: 2020-05-06
    Practice Area: Family Law
    Industry:
    Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
    Judge: District Judge Stark
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Gary R. Spritz, Gary R. Spritz, Esq., Wilmington, DE for father.
    for defendant: Susan E. Morrison, Brandon J. Pakkebier and Daniel A. Taylor, Fish & Richardson P.C., Wilmington, DE for mother.

    Case Number: D68970

    Father established that he was exercising his custodial rights with respect to his minor daughter at the time mother removed the child to the United States. The court ordered mother to return the child to Mexico under the Child Abduction Remedies Act.

  • FP UC Holdings, LLC v. Hamilton

    Publication Date: 2020-04-15
    Practice Area: Employment Litigation
    Industry: Health Care
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Vice Chancellor Slights
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Gregory B. Williams and E. Chaney Hall, Fox Rothschild LLP, Wilmington, DE; Jeffrey J. Bushofsky and Timothy R. Farrell, Ropes & Gray LLP, Chicago, IL for plaintiffs.
    for defendant: Travis S. Hunter and Tyler E. Cragg, Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Grant A. Wright and Max D. Wright, Wright Law, P.C., Tuscumbia, AL for defendants.

    Case Number: D68945

    The court denied plaintiffs' request for a preliminary injunction that would have shut down defendants' competing business, because plaintiffs failed to establish that they were likely to succeed on the merits.

  • Galderma Lab., L.P. v. Medinter US LLC

    Publication Date: 2020-03-25
    Practice Area: Patent Litigation
    Industry: Health Care | Manufacturing
    Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
    Judge: District Judge Burke
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Jack B. Blumenfeld and Michael J. Flynn, Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP, Wilmington, DE; Joseph A. Mahoney, Mayer Brown LLP, Charlotte, NC; B. Clayton McCraw and Ying-Zi Yang, Mayer Brown LLP, New York, NY for plaintiffs.
    for defendant: Melanie K. Sharp, James L. Higgins and Michelle M. Ovanesian, Young Conaway Stargatt & Taylor, LLP, Wilmington, DE; Steven Lieberman, Rachel M. Echols, Daniel R. McCallum and Nicole M. DeAbrantes, Rothwell, Figg, Ernst & Manbeck, P.C., Washington, DC for defendant.

    Case Number: D68922

    The court dismissed plaintiff's claim for direct patent infringement, but it denied the motion to dismiss as to the claim for indi-rect infringement.

  • Neurvana Med., LLC v. Balt USA, LLC

    Publication Date: 2020-03-11
    Practice Area: Corporate Governance
    Industry: Health Care
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Vice Chancellor McCormick
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Jason A. Cincilla, Amaryah K. Bocchino, Ryan W. Browning and Tye C. Bell, Manning Gross + Massenburg LLP, Wilmington, DE; John M. Pierce, Michael M. Pomerantz, Elizabeth C. DeGori and Matthew J. Kokot, Pierce Bainbridge Beck Price & Hecht LLP, New York, NY for plaintiff.
    for defendant: Lori W. Will, Phillip R. Sumpter, Daniyal M. Iqbal, Jeremy W. Gagas, Dylan J. Liddiard, Charles A. Talpas and Brian J. Levy, Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati, P.C., Wilmington, DE, Palo Alto, CA and New York, NY for defendants.

    Case Number: D68907

    The court denied a motion to dismiss regarding a director's pre-resignation conduct, but it dismissed the remainder of plain-tiff's contract and tort claims.

  • Claros Diagnostics, Inc. S'holders Representative Comm. v. OPKO Health, Inc.

    Publication Date: 2020-03-04
    Practice Area: Mergers and Acquisitions
    Industry: Health Care | Manufacturing
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Vice Chancellor Glasscock
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Joanna J. Cline, Christopher B. Chuff, and Ellis E. Harrington, Pepper Hamilton LLP, Wilmington, DE; William W. Taylor and Jaclyn M. Essinger, Pepper Hamilton LLP, Boston, MA for plaintiff.
    for defendant: David J. Teklits and Alexandra M. Cummings, Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP, Wilmington, DE; Kenneth A. Sweder and Brian M. Haney, Sweeder & Ross LLP, Boston, MA for defendant.

    Case Number: D68894

    Stale breach of representation and warranty claims could not be asserted as an equitable affirmative defense for recoupment where the underlying facts were too attenuated from the plaintiff's claims.