• United Atl. Ventures, LLC v. Odyssey Transfer &Trust Co.

    Publication Date: 2024-09-24
    Practice Area: Securities Litigation
    Industry: Investments and Investment Advisory
    Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
    Judge: District Judge Williams
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:

    Case Number: 24-838-GBW

    Court granted shareholder declaratory judgment ordering transfer agent to transfer shares upon notice of the expiration of lockup provisions, where shareholder would otherwise be exposed to potential financial harm if it waited to see whether transfer agent would treat other shareholders more preferably.

  • Bandera Master Fund LP v. Boardwalk Pipeline Partners, LP

    Publication Date: 2024-09-24
    Practice Area: Corporate Governance
    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, James M. Yoch, Jr., 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; William Savitt, Sarah K. Eddy, Adam M. Gogolak, Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz, New York, NY for defendants.

    Case Number: 2018-0372-JTL

    Former limited partners' alternative theories of recovery against general partner in breach of partnership agreement action failed where Delaware Supreme Court had found general partner's reliance on outside counsel's opinion was entitled to conclusive presumption of good faith.

  • In re Sculptor Capital Mgmt. Inc. Stockholder Litig.

    Publication Date: 2024-09-17
    Practice Area: Mergers and Acquisitions
    Industry: Investments and Investment Advisory
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Vice Chancellor Glasscock
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Ned Weinberger, Michael C. Wagner, Labaton Keller Sucharow LLP, Wilmington, DE; Thomas Curry, Saxena White P.A., Wilmington, DE; Joseph L. Christensen, Meghan D. Dougherty, Christensen & Dougherty LLP, Wilmington, DE; A. Thompson Bayliss, Christopher F. Cannataro, Florentina D. Field, Abrams & Bayliss LLP, Wilmington, DE for plaintiff.
    for defendant: Edward B. Micheletti, Arthur R. Bookout, Matthew P. Majarian, Peyton V. Carper, Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP, Wilmington, DE; Brock E. Czeschin, Matthew D. Perri, Kevin M. Kidwell, Mari Boyle, Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A., Wilmington, DE; David E. Ross, Roger S. Stronach, Ross Aronstam & Moritz LLP, Wilmington, DE for defendants.

    Case Number: 2023-0921-SG

    Court calculated legal fee award based on the portion of the transaction price increase that was generated by plaintiff's litigation and the stage of the litigation when the increase was obtained.

  • Shareholder Representative Serv. LLC v. Alexion Pharm., Inc.

    Publication Date: 2024-09-17
    Practice Area: Mergers and Acquisitions
    Industry: Investments and Investment Advisory | Pharmaceuticals
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Vice Chancellor Zurn
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Michael A. Barlow, Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP, Wilmington, DE; Andrew M. Berdon, Angus Chen, Alexandria Deep Conroy, Courtney C. Whang, Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP, New York, NY; Joseph M. Paunovich, David M. Elihu, James Bieber, Andrew Brayton, Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP, Los Angeles, CA for plaintiff.
    for defendant: David E. Wilks, Scott B. Czerwonka, Wilks Law, LLC, Wilmington, DE; Deborah E. Fishman, Carson D. Anderson, Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer LLP, Palo Alto, CA; Daniel L. Reisner, Jeffrey A. Fuisz, Angela R. Vicari, Matthew M. Wilk, Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer LLP, New York, NY; Howard Sklamberg, Jeremy Cobb, Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer LLP, Washington, DC for defendant.

    Case Number: 2020-1069-MTZ

    Deprioritizing and terminating drug development project fell short of commercially reasonable efforts when other companies progressed with developing competing therapies and caused the failure to meet milestones, in breach of the merger agreement.

  • Campus Eye Mgmt. Holdings, LLC v. DiDonato

    Publication Date: 2024-09-17
    Practice Area: Corporate Governance
    Industry: Health Care | Investments and Investment Advisory
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Vice Chancellor Will
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: David J. Margules, Elizabeth A. Sloan, Steven L. Becton, II, Ballard Spahr LLP, Wilmington, DE for plaintiff.
    for defendant: Mary F. Dugan, Emily V. Burton, Tanner C. Jameson, Alan C. Cardenas-Moreno, Young Conaway Stargatt & Taylor LLP, Wilmington, DE for defendant.

    Case Number: 2024-0121-LWW

    Court upheld transaction involving merger of operating subsidiary and amendment of its LLC agreement to remove manager, where the relevant LLC agreements and the LLC Act authorized the actions taken to facilitate the transaction.

  • Law Journal Press | Digital Book

    Chester County Court Rules 2024

    Authors:

    View this Book

    View more book results for the query "*"

  • Fortis Advisors LLC v. Johnson & Johnson

    Publication Date: 2024-09-17
    Practice Area: Mergers and Acquisitions
    Industry: Biotechnology | Investments and Investment Advisory
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Vice Chancellor Will
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Bradley R. Aronstam, Roger S. Stronach, Dylan T. Mockensturm, Ross Aronstam & Moritz LLP, Wilmington, DE; Philippe Z. Selendy, Jennifer M. Selendy, Sean P. Baldwin, Oscar Shine, Selendy Gay PLLC, New York, NY for plaintiff.
    for defendant: William M. Lafferty, Susan W. Waesco, Elizabeth A. Mullin Stoffer, Kirk C. Andersen, Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP, Wilmington, DE; Joshua A. Goldberg, Muhammad U. Faridi, Diana M. Conner, Lauren S. Potter, Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP, New York, NY for defendants.

    Case Number: 2020-0881-LWW

    Evidence demonstrated that acquirer intentionally sabotaged development of seller's new technology to avoid making earnout payments, in violation of the merger agreement's requirement to use commercially reasonable efforts and designate the technology as a company priority.

  • MKE Holdings, Ltd. v. Schwartz

    Publication Date: 2024-09-10
    Practice Area: Corporate Governance
    Industry: Chemicals and Materials | Investments and Investment Advisory | Manufacturing
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Vice Chancellor Glasscock
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Thomas E. Hanson, Jr., William J. Burton, Barnes & Thornburg LLP, Wilmington, DE for plaintiff.
    for defendant: Blake Rohrbacher, Matthew W. Murphy, Sandy Xu, Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A., Wilmington, DE for defendant.

    Case Number: 2018-0729-SG

    Court declined summary judgment dismissal of fraud claims where allegations of withholding of material information could support equitable tolling and plaintiffs plausibly alleged defendants' motive to fraudulently induce plaintiffs' investment.

  • TS Falcon I, LLC v. Golden Mountain Fin. Holdings Corp.

    Publication Date: 2024-09-10
    Practice Area: Corporate Governance
    Industry: Investments and Investment Advisory
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Vice Chancellor Will
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Michael A. Pittenger, Jacqueline A. Roger, Adriane M. Kappauf, Rebecca Bolinger, Potter Anderson & Corroon LLP, Wilmington, DE; Andrew J. Levander, Mauricio A. España, Dechert LLP, New York, NY; Christopher J. Merken, Julia M. Curley, Dechert LLP, Philadelphia, PA for plaintiffs.
    for defendant: Travis S. Hunter, Matthew W. Murphy, John M. O’Toole, Mari Boyle, Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A., Wilmington, DE for defendants.

    Case Number: 2023-1247-LWW

    Corporation's purposeful violation of the express prohibition of setting a retroactive record date for an annual stockholders' meeting warranted invalidating the board election results and reinstating the prior board to hold a new election.

  • Seva Holdings Inc. v. Octo Platform Equity Holdings, LLC

    Publication Date: 2024-09-10
    Practice Area: Corporate Governance
    Industry: Consulting | Investments and Investment Advisory | Technology Media and Telecom
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Chancellor Wallace
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Alan D. Albert, O’Hagan Meyer PLLC, Wilmington, DE; Charles M. Sims, Rachael L. Loughlin, C. Quinn Adams, O’Hagan Meyer PLLC, Richmond, VA for plaintiff.
    for defendant: Brian C. Ralston, Daniel M. Rusk, IV, Potter Anderson & Corroon LLP, Wilmington, DE; Paul A. Werner, Imad Matini, Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton, LLP, Washington, DC for defendant.

    Case Number: 2022-0437-PRW

    Absolute litigation privilege did not bar company from triggering its contractual membership interest repurchase option where public policy interests did not override the parties' contractual agreements.

  • NuVasive, Inc. v. Miles

    Publication Date: 2024-09-03
    Practice Area: Employment Litigation
    Industry: Health Care | Investments and Investment Advisory | Manufacturing
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Vice Chancellor Glasscock
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Ethan H. Townsend, Aaron P. Sayers, McDermott Will & Emery LLP, Wilmington, DE; Rachel B. Cowen, McDermott Will & Emery LLP, Chicago, IL; Morris J. Fodeman, Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati, New York, NY; Jeffery S. Hood, Procopio, Cory, Hargreaves & Savitch LLP, San Diego, CA for plaintiff.
    for defendant: Philip A. Rovner, Potter Anderson & Corroon LLP, Wilmington, DE; Nimalka Wickramasekera, Winston & Strawn LLP, Los Angeles, CA, Brian J. Nisbet, Elizabeth S. Deshaies, Winston & Strawn LLP, Chicago, IL, John C. Sanders, Jr., Winston & Strawn LLP, Dallas, TX for defendants.

    Case Number: 2017-0720-SG

    Failure to disclose passive investment in competitor did not by itself constitute a breach of loyalty where there was no evidence executive acted against his employer's interests, used the investment to obtain an advantage, or had a conflict of interest.