Don’t forget you can visit MyAlerts to manage your alerts at any time.
546 results for '* industry:"Investments and Investment Advisory"' You can use Search Constraints to get even better search results
Publication Date: 2021-12-28
Practice Area: Bankruptcy
Industry: Investments and Investment Advisory
Court: U.S. Bankruptcy Court
Judge: Judge Stickles
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: D69654
The court held that, in this adversary proceeding, the trustee's delay in moving to amend its complaint was not undue; if the amendment was allowed, the defendant would not suffer prejudice, the motion was not brought in bad faith, and the amend-ment would relate back to the original complaint for purposes of the applicable statute of limitations.
Publication Date: 2021-12-21
Practice Area: Contractual Disputes
Industry: Health Care | Investments and Investment Advisory | Technology Media and Telecom
Court: Delaware Superior Court
Judge: Judge Wallace
Attorneys: For plaintiff: David E. Wilks, Scott B. Czerwonka, Wilks Law, LLC, Wilmington, DE; Jordan E. Stern, William H. Newman, Becker, Glynn, Muffly, Chassin & Hosinski, LLP, New York, NY for plaintiff.
for defendant: Catherine A. Gaul, Ashby & Geddes, Wilmington, DE; David B. Anthony, Berger Harris LLP, Wilmington, DE; Beth A. Bryan, Taft Stettinius & Hollister, LLP, Cincinnati, OH for defendants.
Case Number: D69649
The court held that plaintiff's claims were not ripe or justiciable and its breach of representations claim failed to state a claim where plaintiff did not and could not plead damages.
Publication Date: 2021-12-14
Practice Area: Contracts
Industry: Health Care | Investments and Investment Advisory
Court: Delaware Superior Court
Judge: Judge Johnston
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Dominick T. Gattuso, Aaron M. Nelson, Heyman Enerio Gattuso & Hirzel LLP, Wilmington, DE; Anthony J. O’Malley, Rajeev K. Adlakha, Karey E. Werner, Vorys, Sater, Seymour and Pease LLP, Cleveland, OH for plaintiffs
for defendant: D. McKinley Measley, Sabrina M. Hendershot, Michael J. Slobom, Jr., Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP, Wilmington, DE; Britt K. Latham, Bass Berry & Sims PLC, Nashville, TN; Shayne R. Clinton, Bass Berry & Sims PLC, Knoxville, TN for defendants
Case Number: D69642
The court held that plaintiffs properly pled claims of both breach of contract and breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing; at the pleadings stage, plaintiffs were allowed to maintain both claims. Motion to dismiss denied.
Publication Date: 2021-12-14
Practice Area: Corporate Governance
Industry: E-Commerce | Investments and Investment Advisory
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Vice Chancellor Glasscock
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Corinne Elise Amato, Kevin H. Davenport, Jason W. Rigby, Prickett, Jones & Elliott, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Eric L. Zagar, Matthew C. Benedict, Kessler Topaz Meltzer & Check, LLP, Radnor, PA; Patrick C. Lynch, Lynch & Pine, Providence, RI, for plaintiff.
for defendant: Paul J. Lockwood, Jenness E. Parker, Jacob J. Fedechko, Trevor T. Nielsen, Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom, Wilmington, DE; John L. Reed, Ronald N. Brown, III, Peter H. Kyle, Kelly L. Fruend, DLA Piper LLP (US), Wilmington, DE; Rudolf Koch, Matthew D. Perri, Andrew L. Milam, Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Roberto M. Braceras, Caroline H. Bullerjahn, John A. Barker, Dylan E. Schweers, Goodwin Procter LLP, Boston, MA; Kurt M. Heyman, Gillian L. Andrews, Heyman Enerio Gattuso & Hir-zel, LLP, Wilmington, DE; Brandon F. White, Euripides Dalmanieras, Leah S. Rizkallah, Foley Hoag LLP, Boston, MA for defendants.
Case Number: D69638
The court held in this derivative suit that demand was not excused where there was no showing that at least five members of a nine-member board of directors were unable to consider a pre-suit demand. Motions to dismiss granted.
Publication Date: 2021-12-14
Practice Area: Corporate Governance
Industry: Biotechnology | Investments and Investment Advisory
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Vice Chancellor Fioravanti
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Stephen E. Jenkins, F. Troupe Mickler, IV, Ashby & Geddes, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Gregory V. Varallo, Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann LLP, Wilmington, DE; Jeroen van Kwawegen, Daniel E. Meyer, Margaret Sanborn-Lowing, Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann LLP, New York, NY; Gustavo F. Bruckner, Samuel J.Adams, Daryoush Behbood, Pomerantz LLP, New York, NY; Sascha N. Rand, Rollo C. Baker, IV , Silpa Maruri, Jesse Bernstein, Charles H. Sangree, Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP, New York, NY; Stanley D. Bernstein, Matthew Guarnero, Bernstein Liebhard LLP, New York, NY; William J. Fields, Christopher J. Kupka, Samir Shukurov, Fields Kupka & Shukurov LLP, New York, NY for plaintiffs.
for defendant: Brock E. Czeschin, Andrew L. Milam, Richards Layton & Finger, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Riccardo DeBari, Renee Zaytsev, Mendy Pie-karski, Thompson Hine, New York, NY; Matthew F. Davis, Abraham C. Schneider, Potter Anderson & Corroon LLP, Wilmington, DE; Douglas A. Rappaport, Kaitlin D. Shapiro, Elizabeth C. Rosen, Madeleine R. Freeman, Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP, New York, NY for defendants.
Case Number: D69639
The court held that plaintiff shareholders were required to make a demand on the board prior to filing suit. Because they did not make a demand, their claims failed. Motion to dismiss granted.
Law Journal Press | Digital Book
Authors: Jayme C. Long
View this BookView more book results for the query "*"
Publication Date: 2021-12-07
Practice Area: Corporate Governance
Industry: E-Commerce | Investments and Investment Advisory | Technology Media and Telecom
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Vice Chancellor Glasscock
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Neal C. Belgam, Jason Z. Miller, Michael C. Wagner, Smith, Katzenstein & Jenkins LLP, Wilmington, DE; Christopher M. Caparelli, Torys LLP, New York, NY for plaintiff.
for defendant: Thomas G. Macauley, Macauley LLC, Wilmington, DE; Euripides D. Dalmanieras, Foley Hoag LLP, Boston, MA for defendant.
Case Number: D69631
Where a corporation failed to update its stock ledger after acknowledging a convertible note holder's conversion into preferred stock, court could look to extrinsic evidence beyond the ledger to determine standing for a §220 demand.
Publication Date: 2021-11-30
Practice Area: Contracts
Industry: Energy | Investments and Investment Advisory
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Vice Chancellor Laster
Attorneys: For plaintiff: A. Thompson Bayliss, J. Peter Shindel, Jr., Daniel G. Paterno, Eric A. Veres, Samuel D. Cordle, Abrams & Bayliss LLP, Wilmington, DE for plaintiffs.
for defendant: Srinivas M. Raju, Blake Rohrbacher, Matthew D. Perri, John M. O’Toole, Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Rolin P. Bissell, Young Conaway Stargatt & Taylor LLP, Wilmington, DE; Daniel A. Mason, Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP, Wilmington, DE; Stephen P. Lamb, Andrew G. Gordon, Harris Fischman, Robert N. Kravitz, Carter E. Greenbaum, Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP, New York, NY; Lawrence Portnoy, Charles S. Duggan, Gina Cora, Davis Polk & Wardwell LLP, New York, NY, for defendants.
Case Number: D69622
The court held that the General Partner breached the partnership agreement by exercising the call right without first satisfy-ing the Opinion Condition or the Acceptability Condition.
Publication Date: 2021-11-30
Practice Area: Civil Procedure
Industry: Investments and Investment Advisory
Court: Delaware Superior Court
Judge: Judge Adams
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Antranig N. Garibian, Garibian Law Offices PC, Wilmington, DE for plaintiff.
for defendant: Matthew P. Denn, Peter H. Kyle, DLA Piper LLP, Wilmington, DE for defendant.
Case Number: D69625
The court found that the application of the CryoMaid factors weighed in favor of staying the case pending in Delaware in favor of the Israeli litigation based on the doctrine of forum non conveniens.
Publication Date: 2021-11-23
Practice Area: Attorney Compensation
Industry: Investments and Investment Advisory | Legal Services | Technology Media and Telecom
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Vice Chancellor Glasscock
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Gregory V. Varallo, Andrew E. Blumberg, Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann LLP, Wilmington, DE; Michael Hanrahan, Kevin H. Davenport, Mary S. Thomas, Prickett, Jones & Elliott, P.A.; Mark Lebovitch, Jacqueline Y. Ma, Daniel E. Meyer, Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann LLP, New York, NY; Lee D. Rudy, Eric L. Zagar, Christopher M. Windover, Matthew C. Benedict, Kessler Topaz Meltzer & Check, LLP, Randor, PA; Robert D.Klausner, Klausner Kaufman Jensen & Levinson, P.A., Plantation, FL; Aaron T. Morris, Morris Kandinov LLP, Stowe, VT for plaintiffs.
for defendant: Robert S. Saunders, Joseph O. Larkin, Matthew P. Majarian, Ryan M. Lindsay, Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP, Wilmington, DE; Richard B. Harper, Thomas E. O’Brien, Vern Cassin, Baker Botts LLP, New York, NY; Kenneth J. Nachbar, Megan W. Cascio, Thomas P. Will, Sarah P. Kaboly, Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP, Wilmington, DE; Douglas D. Herrmann, Emily L. Wheatley, Troutman Pepper Hamilton Sanders LLP, Wilmington, DE for defendants.
Case Number: D69614
The court held that plaintiffs were entitled to a mootness fee in the amount of 9 million dollars.
Publication Date: 2021-11-16
Practice Area: Corporate Governance
Industry: Investments and Investment Advisory | Pharmaceuticals
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Vice Chancellor Will
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Brian E. Farnan, Michael J. Farnan, Farnan LLP, Wilmington, DE; Steven J. Purcell, Douglas E. Julie, Robert H. Lefkowitz, Anisha Mirchandani, Purcell Julie & Lefkowitz LLP, New York, NY for plaintiffs.
for defendant: Blake Rohrbacher, Alexander M. Krischik, Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Caroline H. Bullerjahn, Goodwin Procter LLP, Boston, MA; Peter B. Ladig, Brett M. McCartney, Bayard P.A., Wilmington, DE for defendants.
Case Number: D69606
The court held that plaintiffs' amended complaint satisfied pleading requirements for a claim of breach of fiduciary duty concerning board approval and implementation of charter amendments where 1) plaintiffs made a valid demand on the board to correct a violation and 2) the allegations supported an inference that the demand was wrongfully refused.
Legal Speak is a weekly podcast that makes sense of what’s happening in the legal industry.
1 minute read