Don’t forget you can visit MyAlerts to manage your alerts at any time.
298 results for '* industry:"Technology Media and Telecom"' You can use Search Constraints to get even better search results
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.
Publication Date: 2024-06-03
Practice Area: Mergers and Acquisitions
Industry: Biotechnology | Technology Media and Telecom
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Vice Chancellor Fioravanti
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Joseph L. Christensen, Christensen & Dougherty LLP., Wilmington, DE for plaintiff.
for defendant: Peter J. Walsh, Jr., Michael A. Pittenger, Justin T. Hymes, Potter Anderson & Corroon LLP, Wilmington, DE for defendant.
Case Number: 2024-0172-PAF
Nominal corporate defendant failed to demonstrate need for continued confidential treatment of the complaint where company could not show how disclosure of remaining redacted information would cause harm to company's competitive advantage that outweighed the public interest in access.
Publication Date: 2024-05-27
Practice Area: Contracts
Industry: Financial Services and Banking | Technology Media and Telecom
Court: Delaware Superior Court
Judge: Judge Davis
Attorneys: For plaintiff: David A. Jenkins, Julie M. O’Dell, Smith Katzenstein & Jenkins LLP, Wilmington, DE; Jonathan K. Waldrop, Marcus Barber, Kasowitz Benson Torres LLP, Redwood Shores, CA; Carolina Diaz-Martinez, Kasowitz Benson Torres LLP, New York, NY for plaintiff.
for defendant: John A. Sensing, P. Andrew Smith, Potter Anderson & Corroon LLP, Wilmington, DE; Bambo Obaro, Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP, Redwood Shores, CA; David J. Lender, Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP, New York, NY for defendants.
Case Number: N23C-04-086 EMD CCLD
Misappropriation claims were untimely where announcement of competing program was sufficient to put plaintiff on notice of potential misappropriation.
Publication Date: 2024-05-27
Practice Area: Labor Law
Industry: E-Commerce | Entertainment and Leisure | Technology Media and Telecom
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Vice Chancellor Zurn
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Rolin P. Bissell, Elena C. Norman, Kevin P. Rickert, Young Conaway Stargatt & Taylor, LLP, Wilmington, DE; Mary Eaton, Thomas Walsh, Christian Vandergeest, Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer US LLP, New York, NY for plaintiff.
for defendant: David A. Felice, Bailey & Glasser LLP, Wilmington, DE; Kevin D. Galbraith, The Galbraith Law Firm, New York, NY; Sean R. O’Brien, A.J. Monaco, O’Brien LLP, New York, NY; Joseph Gallagher, Harris St. Laurent & Wechsler LLP, New York, NY for defendants.
Case Number: 2023-0377-MTZ
Employment agreements' statement of parties' agreement to arbitrate claims generally and reference to AAA created presumption of parties' intention to delegate questions of substantive arbitrability to the arbitrator.
Law Journal Press | Digital Book
Authors: Michael R. Griffinger, Paul F. Cullum III
View this BookView more book results for the query "*"
Publication Date: 2024-05-20
Practice Area: Corporate Governance
Industry: Entertainment and Leisure | Technology Media and Telecom
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Vice Chancellor Glasscock
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Peter B. Andrews, Craig J. Springer, David M. Sborz, Andrew J. Peach, Christopher P. Quinn, Jackson E. Warren, Andrews & Springer LLC, Wilmington, DE; Ned Weinberger, Casimir O. Szustak, Labaton Sucharow LLP, Wilmington, DE; Jeremy S. Friedman, David F.E. Tejtel, Friedman Oster & Tejtel PLLC, Bedford Hills, NY; John Vielandi, Joshua M. Glasser, Labaton Keller Sucharow LLP, New York, NY; D. Seamus Kaskela, Adrienne Bell, Kaskela Law LLC, Newtown Square, PA for plaintiffs.
for defendant: Brian C. Ralston, Charles R. Hallinan, Potter Anderson & Corroon LLP, Wilmington, DE; Andrew R. Gray, Ryan A. Walsh, Natasha Pardawala, Latham and Watkins LLP, Costa Mesa, CA; R. Judson Scaggs, Jr., Susan W. Waesco, Kirk C. Andersen, Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP, Wilmington, DE; Dean Kristy, Fenwick & West LLP, San Francisco, CA; Felix S. Lee, Fenwick & West LLP, Mountain View, CA for defendants.
Case Number: 2023-0396-SG
Breach of fiduciary duty claims failed where plaintiffs failed to allege facts demonstrating that defendants took actions that were to the company's detriment or that interfered with the board's special committee's negotiations for a self-tender.
Publication Date: 2024-04-29
Practice Area: Damages
Industry: E-Commerce | Technology Media and Telecom
Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
Judge: District Judge Connolly
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Robert Charles Lewis, Salem, NJ, pro se plaintiff.
for defendant:
Case Number: 23-785-CFC
Court dismissed purported complaint for royalties due to insufficient allegations regarding any agreement for royalty payments or sales that would trigger a royalty obligation.
Publication Date: 2024-04-22
Practice Area: Copyrights
Industry: Consulting | Software | Technology Media and Telecom
Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
Judge: District Judge Bryson
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 23-325-WCB
Court denied renewed motion for stay pending resolution of interlocutory appeal in related criminal matter where no unexpected events had occurred in that matter and the scope of the limited stay would mean the defendants in the criminal matter would remain unavailable to testify due to their Fifth Amendment privilege.
Publication Date: 2024-04-15
Practice Area: Bankruptcy
Industry: Education | Technology Media and Telecom
Court: U.S. Bankruptcy Court
Judge: Judge Dorsey
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 24-10140 (JTD)
Court could issue preliminary injunctive relief to freeze funds at issue in a fraudulent transfer claim where state law authorized prejudgment attachment and equitable claims also provided a basis to issue preliminary equitable relief.
Publication Date: 2024-04-15
Practice Area: Mergers and Acquisitions
Industry: E-Commerce | Investments and Investment Advisory | Technology Media and Telecom
Court: Delaware Supreme Court
Judge: Justice Seitz
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Michael Hanrahan, J. Clayton Athey, Corinne Elise Amato, Kevin H. Davenport, Stacey A. Greenspan, Jason W. Rigby, Prickett, Jones & Elliott, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Lee D. Rudy, Eric L. Zagar, J. Daniel Albert, Maria T. Starling, Kessler Topaz Meltzer & Check, LLP, Radnor, PA; Robert D. Klausner, Klausner, Kaufman, Jensen & Levinson, Plantation, FL for appellants.
for defendant: William M. Lafferty, John P. DiTomo, Elizabeth A. Mullin, Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP, Wilmington, DE; Theodore N. Mirvis, Jonathan M. Moses, Ryan A. McLeod, Alexandra P. Sadinsky, Canem Ozyildirim, Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz, New York, NY; Blake Rohrbacher, Matthew W. Murphy, Sandy Xu, Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Maeve O’Connor, Susan R. Gittes, Amy C. Zimmerman, Debevoise & Plimpton LLP, New York, NY; David E. Ross, Adam D. Gold, Ross Aronstam & Moritz LLP, Wilmington, DE; Joshua G. Hamilton, Meryn C.N. Grant, Latham & Watkins LLP, Los Angeles, CA; Blair Connelly, Latham & Watkins LLP, New York, NY; Michele D. Johnson, Latham & Watkins LLP, Costa Mesa, CA for appellees.
Case Number: 368, 2022
Chancery court erroneously applied business judgment rule to review transaction where controlling stockholder stood on both sides and received a non-ratable benefit where not all members of the company's separation committee were independent from the controller.
Legal Speak is a weekly podcast that makes sense of what’s happening in the legal industry.
1 minute read