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: 2023-09-04
Practice Area: Contracts
Industry: Manufacturing | Retail | Technology Media and Telecom
Court: Delaware Superior Court
Judge: Judge Davis
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Krista M. Reale, Margolis Edelstein, Wilmington, DE; Herbert W. Mondros, Rigrodsky Law, P.A. Wilmington, DE for plaintiff.
for defendant: K. Tyler O’Connell, Barnaby Grzaslewicz, Samuel E. Bashman, Morris James LLP, Wilmington, DE; Eric C. Liebeler, Kevin Kitchen, Connor Shaull, Stinson LLP, Minneapolis, MN for defendants.
Case Number: N20C-10-121-EMD
Concluding that the facts alleged for the breach of contract claim in the original complaint were similar to those pled in the claim for tortious interference in the amended complaint, the court denied defendant's motion to dismiss finding that defendant was provided sufficient notice of the tortious interference claim to relate back to the original complaint.
Publication Date: 2023-09-04
Practice Area: Contractual Disputes
Industry: E-Commerce | Technology Media and Telecom
Court: Delaware Superior Court
Judge: Judge Rennie
Attorneys: For plaintiff: David Wilks, D. Charles Vavala III, Wilks Law LLC, Wilmington, DE for plaintiffs.
for defendant: Karen Jacobs, Alexandra Cumings, Stephanie Rudolph, Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP, Wilmington, DE for defendants.
Case Number: N23C-01-229 SKR CCLD
The court granted defendant's motion to stay Delaware proceedings in deference to an earlier-filed pending case in federal district court in California finding that the parties and issues presented were substantially identical, the California court could provide prompt and complete justice, and allowing the California and Delaware actions to proceed simultaneously would risk waste of judicial resources and inconsistent resolution of the issues.
Publication Date: 2023-09-04
Practice Area: Contracts
Industry: Education | Software | Technology Media and Telecom
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Vice Chancellor Will
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Laurence C. Cronin, Kelly A. Green, Smith, Katzenstein & Jenkins LLP, Wilmington, DE; William J. Leahy, Tanner McCarron, Littler Mendelson, P.C., Philadelphia, PA for plaintiffs.
for defendant: Richard P. Rollo, Travis S. Hunter, Tyler E. Cragg, Griffin A. Schoenbaum, Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A., Wilmington, DE for defendants.
Case Number: 2023-0546-LWW
Former employees did not breach non-compete agreements where the agreements specifically defined competition as in the business lines of the employer's parent company rather than the employer that the employees worked for.
Publication Date: 2023-08-28
Practice Area: Contracts
Industry: Investments and Investment Advisory | Technology Media and Telecom
Court: Delaware Superior Court
Judge: Judge Adams
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Counsel: Kevin M. Capuzzi, Benesch, Friedlander, Coplan & Aronoff, LLP, Wilmington, DE for plaintiff.
for defendant: Paul D. Brown, Mark L. Desgrosseilliers, Chipman Brown Cicero & Cole, LLP, Wilmington, DE; F. Maximilian Czernin, Peter R. Morrison, Squire Patton Boggs, LLP, Cincinnati, OH for defendant.
Case Number: N22C-12-143 MAA CCLD
Plaintiff, in its capacity as trustee of plaintiff's company, filed suit against the company's investor for breach of contract, fraudulent inducement, and tortious interference with prospective contractual relations, as well as other claims that had been dismissed. Plaintiff alleged that, when its company had been in a precarious financial situation which had been known by defendant, defendant had intentionally interfered with a prospective deal the company was negotiating with another investor by actively discouraging the deal within
Publication Date: 2023-08-28
Practice Area: Contracts
Industry: Consulting | Software | Technology Media and Telecom
Court: Delaware Superior Court
Judge: Judge Johnston
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Anthony N. Delcollo, Thomas H. Kramer, Offit Kurman, P.A., Wilmington, DE for plaintiff.
for defendant: Daniel F. McAllister, McAllister Firm LLC, Wilmington, DE for defendant.
Case Number: N19C-08-199 MMJ CCLD
Court dismissed breach of settlement lawsuit where there was no evidence that defendant breached his representations and warranties in the settlement, which was the sole exclusion to the broad release of claims that included future claims or claims based on heretofore unknown facts.
Law Journal Press | Digital Book
Authors: Shari L. Klevens, Alanna G. Clair
View this BookView more book results for the query "*"
Publication Date: 2023-07-31
Practice Area: Corporate Governance
Industry: Investments and Investment Advisory | Technology Media and Telecom
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Vice Chancellor Glasscock
Attorneys: For plaintiff: F. Troupe Mickler IV, Stephen E. Jenkins, Ashby & Geddes, P.A., Wilmington, DE; William J. Fields, Christopher J. Kupka, Samir Shukurov, Fields Kupka & Shukurov LLP, New York, NY; Gustavo F. Bruckner, Samuel J. Adams, Daryoush Behbood, Pomerantz LLP, New York, NY; Brian Schall, The Schall Law Firm, Los Angeles, CA for plaintiffs.
for defendant: Kevin R. Shannon, Tyler J. Leavengood, Jaclyn C. Levy, Michael C. Gorski, Jr., Lucille E. Wiesner, Potter Anderson & Corroon LLP, Wilmington, DE; Richard B. Harper, Vern Cassin, Thomas E. O’Brien, Alyssa M. Pronley, Kristina Wenner, Baker Botts LLP, New York, NY; Bradley R. Aronstam, S. Reiko Rogozen, Roger S. Stronach, Ross Aronstam & Moritz LLP, Wilmington, DE; Joseph O. Larkin, Matthew P. Majarian, Rupal K. Joshi, Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP, Wilmington, DE; James R. Carroll, Skadden, Arps, Meagher & Flom LLP, Boston, MA for defendants.
Case Number: 2021-1116-SG
The court denied defendants' motion to dismiss plaintiffs' derivative complaint which alleged that one defendant had made a sham offer to purchase another defendant's high vote stock to trigger a call right, which in turn resulted in significant monetary benefits to both defendants and harm to nominal defendant.
Publication Date: 2023-07-17
Practice Area: Labor Law
Industry: Technology Media and Telecom
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Judge: Judge Phipps
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Mark A. Hammervold, Daniel Kotchen, Kotchen & Low, Washington, DC for appellant.
for defendant: Kenneth Gage, Daniel Richards, Paul Hastings, New York, NY for appellee.
Case Number: 21-1365
Non-applicability of American Pipe tolling did not preclude a class action plaintiff from asserting wrong-forum tolling to render their claim timely under the expired statute of limitations.
Publication Date: 2023-07-03
Practice Area: Creditors' and Debtors' Rights
Industry: Financial Services and Banking | Investments and Investment Advisory | Technology Media and Telecom
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Vice Chancellor Cook
Attorneys: For plaintiff: C. Barr Flinn, James M. Yoch, Jr., M. Paige Valeski, Young Conaway Stargatt & Taylor, LLP, Wilmington, DE for plaintiff.
for defendant: Brock E. Czeschin, Angela Lam, John M. O’Toole, Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Patricia L. Enerio, Aaron M. Nelson, Heyman Enerio Gattuso & Hirzel LLP, Wilmington, DE; John M. Lundin, Niall D. Ó Murchadha, Cynthia L. Botello, Lundin PLLC, New York, NY; John A. Sensing, Potter Anderson & Corroon LLP, Wilmington, DE for defendants.
Case Number: 12077-NAC
Adverse judgment in related action between the parties did not compel dismissal of plaintiff's aiding and abetting breach of fiduciary duty and unjust enrichment claims where those claims went beyond the scope of the intercreditor agreement that another state's court concluded precluded plaintiff from recovering for default on its note.
Publication Date: 2023-06-27
Practice Area: Patent Litigation
Industry: Agriculture | Food and Beverage | Technology Media and Telecom
Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
Judge: District Judge Andrews
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Glenn A. Brown, Real World Law, P.C., Wilmington, DE for plaintiffs.
for defendant: Chad S.C. Stover, Barnes & Thornburg LLP, Wilmington, DE for defendant.
Case Number: 20-1170-RGA
Court denied reargument after granting partial summary judgment on defendant's counterclaim, where plaintiffs had waived some of their arguments by failing to raise them during summary judgment proceedings and defendant's supplemental discovery responses could serve as a basis for reargument where parties had an obligation to correct erroneous or incomplete discovery responses.
Publication Date: 2023-06-27
Practice Area: Patent Litigation
Industry: E-Commerce | Manufacturing | Technology Media and Telecom
Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
Judge: District Judge Williams
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Jack B. Blumenfeld, Jennifer Ying, Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP, Wilmington, DE; Scott D. Sherwin, Jason C. White, James J. Kritsas, Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP, Chicago, IL; Natalie A. Bennett, Calvin M. Brien, Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP, Washington, DC for plaintiff.
for defendant: Kelly E. Farnan, Nicole K. Pedi, Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Adam Gershenson, Julianna Landsvik, Cooley LLP, Boston, MA; Heidi Keefe, Lowell Mead, Mark Weinstein, Cooley LLP, Palo Alto, CA; Angeline X. Chen, Cooley LLP, New York, NY for defendants.
Case Number: 21-1769-GBW
Disputed patent term was not a coined term where the term included part of another term stipulated as having a plain and ordinary meaning and there was nothing in the claim language to indicate that the remaining words of the term had anything other than their dictionary definition.
Legal Speak is a weekly podcast that makes sense of what’s happening in the legal industry.
1 minute read