Filter This View

  • IP Network Solutions, Inc. v. Nutanix, Inc.

    Publication Date: 2022-02-22
    Practice Area: Contractual Disputes
    Industry: E-Commerce
    Court: Delaware Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Wallace
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Nicholas T. Verna, Womble Bond Dickinson LLP, Wilmington, DE for plaintiff.
    for defendant: Justin M Forcier, Brian M. Rostocki, Reed Smith LLP, Wilmington, DE for defendant.
    Case Number: D69719

    The court held that neither party demonstrated that its reading of the contested operable language of the relevant agreement represented the only reasonable construction as a matter of law.

  • Feenix Payment Sys. LLC v. Blum

    Publication Date: 2022-02-08
    Practice Area: Contractual Disputes
    Industry: Financial Services and Banking
    Court: Delaware Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Davis
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Thomas A. Uebler, Kathleen A. Murphy, McCollom D’Emilio Smith Uebler LLC, Wilmington, DE for plaintiffs.
    for defendant: John A. Sensing, Jesse L. Noa, Potter Anderson & Corroon, Wilmington, DE for defendant.
    Case Number: D69706

    The court held that the absolute litigation privilege barred tort defamation claims made by plaintiff but that the privilege did not bar plaintiffs' claims for violations of nondisparagement and confidentiality clauses when defendant was allegedly in-strumental in a letter being sent to plaintiffs' lenders that disclosed damaging information about plaintiffs.

  • Venator Materials PLC v. Tronox Ltd.

    Publication Date: 2022-01-25
    Practice Area: Contractual Disputes
    Industry: Chemicals and Materials | Manufacturing
    Court: Delaware Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Davis
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: David E. Ross, Garrett B. Moritz, S. Michael Sirkin, Adam D. Gold, S. Reiko Rogozen, Ross Aronstam & Moritz LLP, Wilming-ton, DE for plaintiff/counterclaim defendant.
    for defendant: Patricia A. Winston, Barnaby Grzaslewicz, Morris James LLP, Wilmington, DE, Glen Silverstein, Michael J. Tiffany, Stephanie L. Gase, Daniel A. Johnson, Leader Berkon Colao & Silverstein LLP, New York, NY for defendant/counterclaim plaintiff.
    Case Number: D69689

    The court held that one of plaintiff's motions in limine was premature as issues of relevancy and prejudice raised by plaintiff were better resolved at trial and the other motion in limine to exclude purported expert was without basis because the witness's background clearly made him an expert in the area where he planned to testify. Opposed motions in limine denied.

  • Alatus Aerosystems v. Triumph Aerostructures, LLC

    Publication Date: 2022-01-11
    Practice Area: Contractual Disputes
    Industry: Aerospace | Manufacturing
    Court: Delaware Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Davis
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: John L. Reed, Kelly L. Freund, DLA Piper LLP, Wilmington, DE; Benjamin D. Schuman, Harry P. Rudo, DLA Piper LLP, Baltimore, MD for plaintiff.
    for defendant: Joelle E. Polesky, Stradley Ronon Stevens & Young, LLP, Wilmington, DE; Michael D. O’Mara, Joseph T. Kelleher, Stradley Ronon Stevens & Young LLP, Philadelphia, PA for defendants.
    Case Number: D69673

    The court held that the parties did not reach a settlement agreement as there were material terms that still had not been agreed upon and the conduct of the parties was contrary to an overt manifestation of assent.

  • Fortis Advisors LLC v. Johnson & Johnson

    Publication Date: 2021-12-28
    Practice Area: Contractual Disputes
    Industry: Health Care | Manufacturing
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Vice Chancellor Will
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Bradley R. Aronstam, Roger S. Stronach, Ross, Aronstam & Moritz LLP, Wilmington, DE; Philippe Z. Selendy, Andrew R. Dunlap, Sean P. Baldwin, Joshua S. Margolin, Greg Wolfe, Vivek Tata, Selendy & Gay LLC, New York, NY; Martin S. Schenker, Jeffrey S. Karr, Cooley LLP, San Francisco, CA; Daniel J. Pohlman, Daniel P. Roy III, Cooley LLP, New York, NY for plaintiff.
    for defendant: William M. Lafferty, Susan W. Waesco, Elizabeth A. Mullin, Morris, Nichols, Arsht, & Tunnel LLP, Wilmington, DE; Gary A. Bornstein, Damaris Hernández, LLP, New York, NY for defendants.
    Case Number: D69655

    The court denied defendants' motion to dismiss plaintiffs' claims of common law fraud, breach of implied covenant of good faith, entitlement to recission based upon mutual mistake, and unjust enrichment.

  • Law Journal Press | Digital Book

    Chester County Court Rules 2024

    Authors:

    View this Book

    View more book results for the query "*"

  • BAM Int'l, LLC v. The MSBA Group Inc.

    Publication Date: 2021-12-28
    Practice Area: Contractual Disputes
    Industry: Distribution and Wholesale
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Vice Chancellor Glasscock
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Karen E. Keller, Jeffrey T. Castellano, Nathan R. Hoeschen, Shaw Keller LLP, Wilmington, DE for plaintiff.
    for defendant: Kevin S. Mann, Cross & Simon LLC, Wilmington, DE; John J.E. Markham, II, Markham Read Zerner, LLC, Boston, MA for defendants.
    Case Number: D69661

    Court declined to exercise personal jurisdiction over officers of Delaware corporation where there were insufficient minimum contacts to further support the exercise of jurisdiction under constitutional due process norms.

  • Lima USA, Inc. v. Mahfouz

    Publication Date: 2021-12-21
    Practice Area: Contractual Disputes
    Industry: Health Care | Investments and Investment Advisory | Technology Media and Telecom
    Court: Delaware Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Wallace
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: David E. Wilks, Scott B. Czerwonka, Wilks Law, LLC, Wilmington, DE; Jordan E. Stern, William H. Newman, Becker, Glynn, Muffly, Chassin & Hosinski, LLP, New York, NY for plaintiff.
    for defendant: Catherine A. Gaul, Ashby & Geddes, Wilmington, DE; David B. Anthony, Berger Harris LLP, Wilmington, DE; Beth A. Bryan, Taft Stettinius & Hollister, LLP, Cincinnati, OH for defendants.
    Case Number: D69649

    The court held that plaintiff's claims were not ripe or justiciable and its breach of representations claim failed to state a claim where plaintiff did not and could not plead damages.

  • Finjan LLC v. Trustwave Holdings, Inc.

    Publication Date: 2021-11-16
    Practice Area: Contractual Disputes
    Industry: Software | Technology Media and Telecom
    Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
    Judge: District Judge Stark
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Karen E. Keller, Jeff Castellano, Shaw Keller LLP, Wilmington, DE; Bijal Vakil, Jeremy T. Elman, White & Case LLP, Palo Alto, CA for plaintiff.
    for defendant: Jack B. Blumenfeld, Alexandra M. Cumings, Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP, Wilmington, DE; John S. Letchinger, Baker & Hostetler LLP, Chicago, IL, Jared A. Brandyberry, Baker & Hostetler LLP, Denver, CO for defendants.
    Case Number: D69610

    The court held that 1) plaintiff established personal jurisdiction over defendant Singapore Telecommunications Limited, or Singtel, as to the breach of contract claim by virtue of Singtel' s consent to the forum selection clause, 2) plaintiff failed to establish personal jurisdiction over Singtel as to the patent infringement claim and 3) Singtel established good cause to stay plaintiff's breach of contract claim against it.

  • Blue Cube Spinco LLC v. The Dow Chem. Co.

    Publication Date: 2021-10-13
    Practice Area: Contractual Disputes
    Industry: Chemicals and Materials | Manufacturing
    Court: Delaware Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Wallace
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: David E. Ross, Adam D. Gold, Anthony M. Calvano, Ross Aronstam & Mortitz LLP, Wilmington, DE; Craig C. Martin, Matthew J. Thomas, Skyler J. Silvertrust, Chloe Holt, Willkie Farr & Gallagher LLP, Chicago, IL; Shaimaa M. Hussein, Willkie Farr & Gallagher LLP, New York, NY for plaintiff.
    for defendant: David J. Soldo, Morris James LLP, Wilmington, DE; Joseph B. Schmit, Richard Weingarten, Phillips Lytle LLP, New York, NY for defendant.
    Case Number: D69567

    Plaintiff adequately stated a claim for breach of contract where it alleged that defendant's actions regarding the real property sold to plaintiff arguably caused plaintiff to suffer quantifiable losses, thereby triggering a duty to indemnify plaintiff.

  • GMF ELCM Fund L.P. v. ELCM HCRE GP LLC

    Publication Date: 2021-10-06
    Practice Area: Contractual Disputes
    Industry: Health Care | Investments and Investment Advisory | Real Estate
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Vice Chancellor Glasscock
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Daniel E. Ross, Bradley R. Aronstam, Ross Aronstam & Moritz, Wilmington, DE; Joshua S. Amsel, Matthew R. Friedenberg, Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP, New York, NY for plaintiffs.
    for defendant: Joseph H. Huston, Jr., Stevens & Lee P.C., Wilmington, DE; Robert K. Keach, Bernstein, Shur, Sawyer & Nelson, Portland, ME for receiver. Ryan P. Newell, Young Conaway Stargatt & Taylor, LLP, Wilmington, DE for nominal defendants.
    Case Number: D69561

    Claimant was entitled to indemnification of his litigation expenses, and the court granted his motion to intervene because he had a valid property interest which was not adequately protected by existing parties.