Don’t forget you can visit MyAlerts to manage your alerts at any time.
130 results for '* industry:"Legal Services"' You can use Search Constraints to get even better search results
Publication Date: 2022-07-05
Practice Area: Criminal Law
Industry: Legal Services
Court: Delaware Superior Court
Judge: Judge Davis
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Matthew B. Frawley, Deputy Attorney General, Department of Justice, Wilmington, DE for plaintiff.
for defendant: Joshua Chattin, DE, pro se defendant.
Case Number: D69877
Postconviction motion dismissed as untimely where alleged newly discovered evidence was either known to defendant at the time of conviction or was not relevant to the trial proceedings.
Publication Date: 2022-05-10
Practice Area: Antitrust
Industry: Legal Services | Technology Media and Telecom
Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
Judge: District Judge Stark
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Jack B. Blumenfeld, Michael J. Flynn, Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP, Wilmington, DE; Dale M. Cendali, Joshua L. Simmons, Eric A. Loverro, Kirkland & Ellis LLP, New York, NY; Daniel E. Laytin, Christa C. Cottrell, Alyssa C. Kalisky, Cameron D. Ginder, Kirkland & Ellis LLP, Chicago, IL for plaintiffs.
for defendant: David E. Moore, Potter Anderson & Corroon LLP, Wilmington, DE; Gabriel M. Ramsey, Warrington Parker, Jacob Canter, Crowell & Moring LLP, San Francisco, CA; Mark A. Klapow, Lisa Kimmel, Crowell & Moring LLP, Washington, DC for defendant.
Case Number: D69812
Tying claims under the Sherman Act and state unfair competition statutes permitted to proceed where there was sufficient evidence that bundled products did constitute separate products serving separate markets and where unilateral action was sufficient to support a restraint of trade claim.
Publication Date: 2022-05-03
Practice Area: Civil Appeals
Industry: Construction | Legal Services
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Judge: Judge Phipps
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: D69803
The court found that defendants' notice of appeal was premature and that the later order that set the amount of sanctions was the order that should have been the basis for appeal.
Publication Date: 2022-04-19
Practice Area: Business Torts
Industry: Legal Services
Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
Judge: District Judge Bibas
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Brian E. Farnan, Michael J. Farnan, Farnan LLP, Wilmington, DE; Kristina D. McKenna, Sheryl Koval Garko, Ryan C. Wooten, Shayan Said, Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP, Boston, MA, Houston, TX, San Francisco, CA for plaintiff.
for defendant: Jonathan A. Choa, Daniel Rusk, Potter Anderson & Corroon, LLP, Wilmington, DE; Eric M. Fishman, Jay. D. Dealy, Max. A. Winograd, Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP, New York, NY for defendant.
Case Number: D69787
The court held the claim under the Lanham Act was governed by F.R.C.P. 9 that required the plaintiff to plead fraud with heightened specificity.
Publication Date: 2022-04-05
Practice Area: Bankruptcy
Industry: Legal Services | Real Estate
Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
Judge: District Judge Connolly
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: D69771
Bankruptcy court did not err in issuing a contempt order based on appellant's failure to comply with an order for the disgorgement of fees, where the bankruptcy court had not impermissibly expanded the scope or nature of appellant's status as a fictitious entity, as appellant had previously represented itself as one.
Law Journal Press | Digital Book
Authors: Michael R. Griffinger, Paul F. Cullum III
View this BookView more book results for the query "*"
Publication Date: 2022-03-29
Practice Area: Corporate Governance
Industry: Legal Services | Technology Media and Telecom
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Chancellor McCormick
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Frank E. Noyes, II, Offit Kurman, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Douglas Capuder, Capuder Fazio Giacoia LLP, New York, NY for plaintiff.
for defendant: David E. Ross, Bradley R. Aronstam, Eric D. Selden, S. Michael Sirkin, Adam D. Gold, Benjamin Z. Grossberg, Ross Aronstam & Moritz LLP, Wilmington, DE; for defendants.
Case Number: D69759
The court held that subject matter jurisdiction could be exercised by Chancery Court because the order giving authority to the custodian was issued by Chancery Court. Further, the court held that plaintiff failed to state a claim upon relief could be granted. Plaintiff's motion to dismiss denied; defendant's motion to dismiss granted.
Publication Date: 2021-12-28
Practice Area: Contracts
Industry: Entertainment and Leisure | Legal Services
Court: Delaware Superior Court
Judge: Judge Wallace
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Theodore A. Kittila, James G. MacMillan, III, Halloran Farkas + Kittila LLP, Wilmington, DE; Eric M. George, Kim S. Zeldin, Browne George Ross LLP, Los Angeles CA for plaintiffs.
for defendant: Robert K. Beste, Jason Z. Miller, Smith, Katzenstein & Jenkins LLP, Wilmington, DE; Marvin S. Putnam, Jessica Stebbins Bina, R. Peter Durning, Jr., Latham & Watkins LLP, Los Angeles, CA for defendants.
Case Number: D69659
Motion of law firm to intervene to attach an attorney's lien for a judgment for unpaid legal fees denied where firm's right to attach the lien was contractually limited only to causes of actions that were the subject of the engagement agreement, and the firm sought to intervene in a completely unrelated legal action.
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: 2021-10-27
Practice Area: Bankruptcy
Industry: Legal Services
Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
Judge: District Judge Connolly
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: D69588
Bankruptcy court properly sanctioned and disqualified special counsel where it failed to disclose the nature of its business structure and the fact that it had financial arrangements that were adverse to the interests of debtor clients regarding matters for which counsel had been retained.
Publication Date: 2021-09-01
Practice Area: Legal Malpractice
Industry: Financial Services and Banking | Legal Services | Real Estate
Court: Delaware Supreme Court
Judge: Justice Vaughn
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Patrick K. Gibson, Ippoliti Law Group, Wilmington, DE for appellants.
for defendant: Carol A. Vanderwoude, Marshall Dennehey Warner Coleman & Goggin, P.C., Philadelphia, PA, Art C. Aranilla, Marshall Dennehey Warner Coleman & Goggin, P.C., Wilmington, DE for appellee.
Case Number: D69520
Former clients sufficiently pled legal malpractice cause of action by alleging that legal counsel negligently advised clients to pursue litigation strategy that had no merit, resulting in clients incurring unnecessary litigation expense.
Legal Speak is a weekly podcast that makes sense of what’s happening in the legal industry.
1 minute read