Don’t forget you can visit MyAlerts to manage your alerts at any time.
197 results for '* judge:"Chancellor Glasscock"' You can use Search Constraints to get even better search results
Publication Date: 2019-11-13
Practice Area: Corporate Governance
Industry: E-Commerce | Retail | Software
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Vice Chancellor Glasscock
Attorneys: For plaintiff: A. Thompson Bayliss and Adam K. Schulman, Abrams & Bayliss LLP, Wilmington, DE; Peter L. Welsh and Paul S. Kellogg, Ropes & Gray LLP, Boston, MA for plaintiff.
for defendant: T. Brad Davey and Andrew H. Sauder, Potter Anderson & Corroon LLP, Wilmington, DE; Steven J. Rosenwasser and Fredric J. Bold, Jr., Bondurant Mixson & Elmore LLP, Atlanta, GA for defendants.
Case Number: D68766
Advancement mooted where former employer amended underlying breach of employment agreement claim to remove all allegations of misconduct arising from former employee's corporate role or powers.
Publication Date: 2019-11-06
Practice Area: Corporate Entities
Industry: Pharmaceuticals
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Vice Chancellor Glasscock
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Peter B. Andrews, Craig J. Springer, and David M. Sborz, Andrews & Springer LLC, Wilmington DE; Randall J. Baron, David. T. Wissbroecker, Christopher H. Lyons, Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP, San Diego, CA and Nashville, TN for plaintiff.
for defendant: David E. Ross and S. Michael Sirkin, Ross Aronstam & Moritz LLP, Wilmington, DE; Peter L. Welsh, Christian Reigstad, and Mary Zhou, Ropes & Gray LLP, New York NY for defendant.
Case Number: D68759
Stockholder demonstrated entitlement to a Section 220 inspection by alleging facts sufficient to raise an inference that company used their control position to extract a unique benefit from the merger to support stockholder's claim of breach of fiduciary duties.
Publication Date: 2019-10-16
Practice Area: Class Actions
Industry: Energy | Investments and Investment Advisory
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Vice Chancellor Glasscock
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Michael J. Barry and Michael T. Manuel, Grant & Eisenhofer P.A., Wilmington, DE; Peter B. Andrews and Craig J. Springer, Andrews & Springer LLC, Wilmington, DE; Jeremy Friedman, Spender Oster and David Tejtel, Friedman Oster & Tejtel PLLC, New York, NY for plaintiff.
for defendant: Robert S. Saunders, Ronald N. Brown, III, Ryan M. Lindsay, Noelle M. Reed, Daniel S. Mayerfeld and Alston L. Walker, Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP, Wilmington, DE and Houston, TX for defendant.
Case Number: D68737
The value of a derivative claim was not material in the context of a merger, so plaintiff lacked standing in this class action.
Publication Date: 2019-10-09
Practice Area: Corporate Governance
Industry: Agriculture | Chemicals and Materials
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Vice Chancellor Glasscock
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Thomas E. Hanson, Jr., Barnes & Thornburg LLP, Wilmington, DE for plaintiffs.
for defendant: Blake Rohrbacher, Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A., Wilmington, DE; John F. Hartmann and Abdus Samad Pardesi, Kirkland & Ellis LLP, Chicago, IL for defendants and nominal defendant.
Case Number: D68730
A limited liability company's operating agreement waived any fiduciary duty on the part of its members, and instead imposed a good faith standard.
Publication Date: 2019-09-11
Practice Area: Contractual Disputes
Industry: Health Care | Manufacturing
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Vice Chancellor Glasscock
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Philip Trainer, Jr. and Aaron P. Sayers, Ashby & Geddes, Wilmington, DE; Rachel B. Cowen, Michael J. Sheehan and Emory D. Moore, Jr., McDermott Will & Emery, Chicago, IL; Christopher W. Cardwell, Gullet, Sanford, Robinson & Martin, Nash-ville, TN for plaintiff.
for defendant: Philip A. Rovner and Jonathan A. Choa, Potter Anderson & Corroon LLP, Wilmington, DE; Micha Danzig, Eric J. Eastham and Paul M. Huston, Mintz Levin Cohn Ferris Glovsky & Popeo, P.C., San Diego, CA for defendant.
Case Number: D68699
Although the parties' employment contract contained a choice of law provision in favor of Delaware, another state's public policy disfavored restraints on trade, so that state had a materially greater interest than Delaware with respect to the contract's non-solicitation and non-compete provisions.
Law Journal Press | Digital Book
Authors: Trey Cox, Jason Dennis
View this BookView more book results for the query "*"
Publication Date: 2019-08-28
Practice Area: Business Torts
Industry: Investments and Investment Advisory
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Vice Chancellor Glasscock
Attorneys: For plaintiff: R. Judson Scaggs, Jr., Barnaby Grzaslewicz and Elizabeth A. Mullin, Morris Nichols Arsht & Tunnel, Wilmington, DE; David H. Wollmuth, R. Scott Thompson, Michael C. Ledley, Sean P. McGonigle, William A. Maher, Nicole C. Rende and Jay S. Han-dlin, Wollmuth Maher & Deutsch LLP, New York, NY for plaintiff.
for defendant: Peter J. Walsh, Jr., Jennifer C. Wasson, David A. Seal and Robert J. Kumor, Potter Anderson & Corroon LLP, Wilmington, DE; Eva W. Cole, John E. Schreiber, Molly M. Donovan, Joseph A. Litman and Mikaela E. Evans-Aziz, Winston & Strawn LLP, New York, NY for defendants.
Case Number: D68682
The chancery court, as a court of equity, could not enjoin future defamatory statements.
Publication Date: 2019-08-28
Practice Area: Mergers and Acquisitions
Industry: Investments and Investment Advisory
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Vice Chancellor Glasscock
Attorneys: For plaintiff: John L. Reed, DLA Piper LLP, Wilmington, DE for petitioner.
for defendant: Samuel A. Nolen, Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A., Wilmington, DE for respondent.
Case Number: D68680
Sophisticated stockholders could contractually waive statutory appraisal rights for a future transaction not yet contemplated where such waiver was expressly clear.
Publication Date: 2019-08-21
Practice Area: Corporate Entities
Industry: Health Care | Investments and Investment Advisory
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Vice Chancellor Glasscock
Attorneys: For plaintiff: David E. Ross and Bradley R. Aronstam, Ross Aronstam & Moritz LLP, Wilmington, DE; Joshua S. Amsel, Matthew R. Friedenberg, and Thomas G. James, Weil, Gotshal & Manges, LLP, New York, NY for plaintiffs.
for defendant: David E. Ross and Bradley R. Aronstam, Ross Aronstam & Moritz LLP, Wilmington, DE for receiver.
Case Number: D67675
Judicial dissolution of limited partnership granted where principal manager demonstrated unwillingness or inability to operate business based on repeated refusals to work with court-appointed receiver or comply with court orders.
Publication Date: 2019-08-14
Practice Area: Insurance Law
Industry:
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Vice Chancellor Glasscock
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Martin S. Lessner, Richard J. Thomas, and M. Paige Valeski, Young Conaway Stargatt & Taylor, LLP, Wilmington, DE; James P. Gillespie, Kirkland & Ellis LLP, Washington, DC; Adam T. Humann, Kirkland & Ellis, New York, NY; Brian C. Ralston, Potter Anderson & Corroon LLP, Wilmington, DE for plaintiffs.
for defendant: Kenneth J. Nachbar and Sabrina M. Hendershot, Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP, Wilmington, DE; Joel Friedlander and Christopher P. Quinn, Friedlander & Gorris, P.A, Wilmington, De; John L. Jacobus, J. Walker Johnson, Catherine D. Cockerham, and Michael E. Stoll, Steptoe & Johnson LLP, Washington, DC, for defendants.
Case Number: D68662
Court lacked subject matter jurisdiction where plaintiffs would obtain complete relief if they received money damages from defendants' alleged breach of the parties' agreement.
Publication Date: 2019-08-14
Practice Area: Real Estate
Industry:
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Vice Chancellor Glasscock
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Michael R. Smith, The Smith Firm, LLC, Seaford, DE for petitioner.
for defendant: Richard H. Morse and Meghann O. Karasic, Community Legal Aid Society, Wilmington, DE for respondent.
Case Number: D68664
Discrimination claim failed where there was no evidence that the single act of alleged discrimination was motivated by claimants' race, familial status, or the disability of claimants' child.
Legal Speak is a weekly podcast that makes sense of what’s happening in the legal industry.
1 minute read