Don’t forget you can visit MyAlerts to manage your alerts at any time.
296 results for '* industry:"Technology Media and Telecom"' You can use Search Constraints to get even better search results
Publication Date: 2024-07-02
Practice Area: Corporate Governance
Industry: Legal Services | Technology Media and Telecom
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Chancellor McCormick
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Jeremy D. Eicher, Eicher Law LLC, Wilmington, DE; Frank E. Noyes, II, Offit Kurman, P.A., Wilmington, DE for petitioner.
for defendant: Douglas D. Herrmann, Troutman Pepper Hamilton Sanders LLP, Wilmington, DE; Jennifer C. Voss, Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP Wilmington, DE for respondent.
Case Number: 9700-CM, 10449-CM
Court overruled corporation's objections to custodian's legal fee petitions where court had already ruled on custodian's entitlement to fees and found no basis to support corporations' challenges to the reasonableness of the fees.
Publication Date: 2024-06-25
Practice Area: Mergers and Acquisitions
Industry: Health Care | Investments and Investment Advisory | Technology Media and Telecom
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Vice Chancellor Laster
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Bradley R. Aronstam, Roger S. Stronach, Holley E. Newell, Ross Aronstam & Moritz LLP, Wilmington, DE; David S. Flugman, Lauren J. Zimmerman, Korey Boehm, Selendy Gay PLLC, New York, NY for plaintiffs.
for defendant: Susan W. Waesco, Emily C. Friedman, Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP, Wilmington, DE; William C. Jackson, Ashley Moore Drake, Goodwin Procter LLP, Washington, D.C.; Ariel E. Rogers, Goodwin Procter LLP, Redwood City, CA; Lauren E. Jackson, Goodwin Procter LLP, Boston, MA for defendant.
Case Number: 2023-0699-JTL
Statements that did not constitute mere puffery were sufficient to state a fraud claim where plaintiff adequately alleged defendant's scienter and where the parties' contract lacked an anti-reliance clause.
Publication Date: 2024-06-25
Practice Area: Corporate Governance
Industry: E-Commerce | Education | Technology Media and Telecom
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Vice Chancellor Fioravanti
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Kurt M. Heyman, Gillian L. Andrews, Heyman Enerio Gattuso & Hirzel LLP, Wilmington, DE; Gustavo F. Bruckner, Samuel J. Adams, Ankita Sangwan, Pomerantz LLP, New York, NY for plaintiff.
for defendant: William M. Lafferty, Susan W. Waesco, Emily C. Friedman, Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP, Wilmington, DE; Dean S. Kristy, Jennifer C. Bretan, Fenwick & West LLP, San Francisco, CA; Felix S. Lee, Fenwick & West LLP, Mountain View, CA; Ethan H. Townsend, Daniel T. Menken, McDermott Will & Emery LLP, Wilmington, DE; Timothy E. Hoeffner, McDermott Will & Emery LLP, New York, NY for defendants.
Case Number: 2023-0180-PAF
Company's proxy statement was not materially misleading where company was not obligated to state that customers used the company's products to cheat and use of products in that manner was reasonably foreseeable.
Publication Date: 2024-06-18
Practice Area: Corporate Governance
Industry: Technology Media and Telecom
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Vice Chancellor Glasscock
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Joseph L. Christensen, McCollom D’Emilio Smith Uebler LLC, Wilmington, DE; Brian J. Dunne, Edward M. Grauman, Bathaee Dunne LLP, Austin, TX; Yavar Bathaee, Andrew C. Wolinsky, Bathaee Dunne LLP, New York, NY for plaintiff.
for defendant: A. Thompson Bayliss, Peter C. Cirka, E. Wade Houston, Abrams & Bayliss LLP, Wilmington, DE; Roger A. Cooper, Mark E. McDonald, Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton LLP, New York, NY for defendants.
Case Number: 2022-0819-SG
Demand was not excused where plaintiff failed to plead specific facts demonstrating that directors acted disloyally to confer a non-ratable benefit to the corporate parent at the parent's direction.
Publication Date: 2024-06-18
Practice Area: Corporate Governance
Industry: Investments and Investment Advisory | Technology Media and Telecom
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Vice Chancellor Will
Attorneys: For plaintiff: David L. Finger, Finger & Slanina, LLC, Wilmington, DE for plaintiffs.
for defendant: Matthew D. Perri, Daniel E. Kaprow, Elizabeth J. Freud, Alfred P. Dillione, Rae Ra, Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A., Wilmington, DE for defendant.
Case Number: 2024-0311-LWW
Court ordered a bond due to the potential for defendant suffering financial losses in connection with a status quo order that restricted defendant from transferring securities it was set to receive.
Law Journal Press | Digital Book
Authors:
View this BookView more book results for the query "*"
Publication Date: 2024-06-11
Practice Area: Damages
Industry: Technology Media and Telecom
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Vice Chancellor Will
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Joseph L. Christensen, Meghan M. Dougherty, Michael D. Bell, Christensen & Dougherty LLP, Wilmington, DE; Edward D. Totino, Benjamin W. Turner, Baker McKenzie LLP, Los Angeles, CA; Conal Doyle, Doyle Law APC, Beverly Hills, CA for plaintiff.
for defendant: Robert L. Burns, Kyle H. Lachmund, Nicole M. Henry, Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Jennifer Selendy, Joshua S. Margolin, David A. Coon, Selendy Gay PLLC, New York, NY for defendants.
Case Number: 2021-0595-LWW
Court rejected use of highest intermediate price method to calculate former employee's losses from improperly applied lockup where there was an adequate record to calculate the average stock price over a reasonable trading period.
Publication Date: 2024-06-11
Practice Area: Business Torts
Industry: Technology Media and Telecom
Court: Delaware Superior Court
Judge: Judge Davis
Attorneys: For plaintiff: David J. Soldo, Morris James LLP, Wilmington, DE; Anne Mercado Clark, Jeffrey D. Coren, Phillips Lytle LLP, Buffalo, NY for plaintiff.
for defendant: Catherine A. Gaul, Randall J. Teti, Ashby & Geddes, Wilmington, DE; George A. Gasper, Ice Miller LLP, Indianapolis, IN; Ethan H. Townsend, Daniel T. Menken, McDermott Will & Emery LLP, Wilmington, DE for defendants.
Case Number: N23C-06-090 EMD CCLD
Aiding and abetting clause plausibly alleged as to sellers' advisors where they were involved in due diligence and thus plausibly could have assisted sellers in withholding material information, which breached representations and warranties.
Publication Date: 2024-06-11
Practice Area: Corporate Governance
Industry: Automotive | Manufacturing | Technology Media and Telecom
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Vice Chancellor McCormick
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Gregory V. Varallo, Glenn R. McGillivray, Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann LLP, Wilmington, DE; Peter B. Andrews, Craig J. Springer, David M. Sborz, Andrew J. Peach, Jackson E. Warren, Andrews & Springer LLC, Wilmington, DE; Catherine A. Gaul, Ashby & Geddes, P.A., Wilmington, DE; John L. Reed, Ronald N. Brown, III, Caleb G. Johnson, Daniel P. Klusman, DLA Piper LLP (US), Wilmington, DE for plaintiff.
for defendant: David E. Ross, Garrett B. Moritz, Thomas C. Mandracchia, Ross Aronstam & Moritz LLP, Wilmington, DE; William M. Lafferty, Susan W. Waesco, Ryan D. Stottmann, Miranda N. Gilbert, Jacob M. Perrone, Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP, Wilmington, DE; Rudolf Koch, John D. Hendershot, Kevin M. Gallagher, Andrew L. Milam, Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A., Wilmington, DE for defendants.
Case Number: 2018-0408-KSJM
Court denied plaintiff's motions to expedite resolution of post-trial issues based on defendants' assertion that an upcoming shareholder proxy vote would not affect the litigation.
Publication Date: 2024-06-11
Practice Area: Mergers and Acquisitions
Industry: Education | Investments and Investment Advisory | Technology Media and Telecom
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Vice Chancellor Glasscock
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Thaddeus J. Weaver, Dilworth Paxson LLP, Wilmington, DE; Thomas S. Biemer, Patrick M. Northen, Dilworth Paxson LLP, Philadelphia, PA for plaintiff.
for defendant: Robert L. Burns, Kyle H. Lachmund, Richards Layton & Finger, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Thomas A. Uebler, McCollom D’Emilio Smith Uebler LLC, Wilmington, DE; Steven M. Hecht, Rolnick Kramer Sadighi LLP, New York, NY for defendants.
Case Number: 2022-0719-SG
Investor's contractual claims arising from company's acquisition failed where investor failed to adequately plead a frustration of its contractual rights by defendants or the existence of such rights under the parties' agreements.
Publication Date: 2024-06-03
Practice Area: Mergers and Acquisitions
Industry: Financial Services and Banking | Technology Media and Telecom
Court: Delaware Supreme Court
Judge: Justice Traynor
Attorneys: For plaintiff: A. Thompson Bayliss, Michael A. Barlow, Eliezer Y. Feinstein, Abrams & Bayliss LLP, Wilmington, DE; R. Brian Timmons, David M. Grable, Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP, Los Angeles, CA; David Cooper, Deborah K. Brown, Nathan Goralnik, Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP, New York, NY for appellants.
for defendant: Bradley R. Aronstam, S. Michael Sirkin, Ross Aronstam & Moritz LLP, Wilmington, DE; Andrew Ditchfield, Brian M. Burnovski, Pascale Bibi, Kyra Macy Kaufman, Davis Polk & Wardwell LLP, New York, NY; Neal Kumar Katyal, Nathaniel A.G. Zelinsky, Hogan Lovells US LLP, Washington, D.C., Dennis H. Tracey, III, Hogan Lovells US LLP, New York, NY for appellees.
Case Number: 2022-0808
Court remanded for reconsideration of interpretation of contractual requirement using extrinsic evidence where both parties proffered reasonable interpretations of the provision.
Legal Speak is a weekly podcast that makes sense of what’s happening in the legal industry.
1 minute read