• Lighthouse Behavioral Health Solutions, LLC v. Milestone Addiction Counseling, LLC

    Publication Date: 2023-05-30
    Practice Area: Mergers and Acquisitions
    Industry: Health Care
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Vice Chancellor Zurn
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Philip A. Rovner, Jonathan A. Choa, Potter Anderson & Corroon LLP, Wilmington, DE; Marisa B. Miller, Kevin K. Chang, Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton LLP, San Diego, CA for plaintiff.
    for defendant: Sidney S. Liebesman, E. Chaney Hall, Nathaniel J. Klepser, Fox Rothschild LLP, Wilmington, DE; Erik J. Clark, Organ Law LLP, Columbus, OH for defendants.

    Case Number: 2022-0979-MTZ

    Although federal law obligated acquired healthcare provider to obtain patient consent before turning over records to acquirer, the provider nonetheless breached its contractual obligations to transfer the records and its representations and warranties that it had taken all action necessary to perform and that the transaction complied with applicable law.

  • City of Coral Springs Police Officers' Pension Plan v. Dorsey

    Publication Date: 2023-05-23
    Practice Area: Mergers and Acquisitions
    Industry: Financial Services and Banking | E-Commerce | Entertainment and Leisure
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Chancellor McCormick
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Thomas Curry, Tayler D. Bolton, Saxena White P.A., Wilmington, DE; David Wales, Sara DiLeo, Saxena White P.A., White Plains, NY; Adam Warden, Jonathan Lamet, Saxena White P.A., Boca Raton, FL for plaintiff.
    for defendant: Raymond J. DiCamillo, Kevin M. Gallagher, Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Colin B. Davis, Katie Beaudin, Gibson Dunn & Crutcher LLP, Irvine, CA; Brian M. Lutz, Gibson Dunn & Crutcher LLP, San Francisco, CA; Lissa M. Percopo, Gibson Dunn & Crutcher LLP, Washington, DC for defendants.

    Case Number: 2022-0091-KSJM

    Stockholder failed to plead demand futility where transaction committee who approved acquisition of failing company did not act in bad faith and therefore would not be subject to a substantial risk of personal liability for the acquisition.

  • In re Edgio, Inc. Stockholders' Litig.

    Publication Date: 2023-05-16
    Practice Area: Mergers and Acquisitions | Telecommunications
    Industry: E-Commerce | Investments and Investment Advisory
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Vice Chancellor Zurn
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Gregory V. Varallo, Daniel E. Meyer, Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossman LLP, Wilmington, DE; Mark Lebovitch, Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossman LLP, New York, NY; Jeremy Friedman, David Tejtel, Friedman Oster & Tejtel PLLC, Bedford Hills, NY for plaintiffs.
    for defendant: Rudolf Koch, Kyle H. Lachmund, John M. O’Toole, Kevin M. Kidwell, Richards Layton & Finger, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Deborah Birnbach, Tucker DeVoe, Goodwin Procter LLP, Boston, MA for defendants.

    Case Number: 2022-0624-MTZ

    Corwin cleansing could not apply to injunctive relief claim against entrenching/defensive measures in stockholders' agreement, and plaintiffs alleged sufficient facts to support inference that company board negotiated those measures for itself to protect against stockholder activism.

  • LPPAS Representative, LLC v. ATH Holding Co., LLC

    Publication Date: 2023-05-16
    Practice Area: Mergers and Acquisitions
    Industry: Federal Government | Health Care | Insurance
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Chancellor McCormick
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Kelly L. Freund, Michelle Morgan, DLA Piper LLP, Wilmington, DE; A. Thompson Bayliss, E. Wade Houston, Peter C. Cirka, Abrams & Bayliss LLP, Wilmington, DE for plaintiffs.
    for defendant: Kevin M. Coen, Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP, Wilmington, DE; Thomas Uebler, McCollum D’Emilio Smith Uebler LLC, Wilmington, DE; Glenn M. Kurtz, Elizabeth Stainton, White & Case LLP, New York, NY for defendants.

    Case Number: 2020-0241-KSJM

    Where indemnification provision in company purchase agreement gave sellers the right to participate in the defense of third-party claims brought by government regulators, purchasers breached those rights by unilaterally negotiating a tolling agreement with regulators.

  • Teuza A Fairchild Tech. Venture Ltd. v. Lindon

    Publication Date: 2023-05-09
    Practice Area: Mergers and Acquisitions
    Industry: Biotechnology | Investments and Investment Advisory
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Vice Chancellor Glasscock
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Stephen E. Jenkins, Samuel M. Gross, Ashby & Geddes, Wilmington, DE; Donald J. Enright, Elizabeth K. Tripodi, Jordan A. Cafritz, Levi & Korsinsky, LLP, Washington, DC for plaintiff.
    for defendant: Raymond J. DiCamillo, Kevin M. Gallagher, Kyle H. Lachmund, Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Adam H. Offenhartz, M. Jonathan Seibald, Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP, New York, NY; Kevin M. Coen, Stephanie Rudolph, Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP, Wilmington, DE; Scott B. Czerwonka, Andrea S. Brooks, Wilks Law, LLC, Wilmington, DE; Kurt M. Heyman, Jamie L. Brown, Heyman Enerio Gattuso & Hirzel LLP, Wilmington, DE; John F. Baughman, Daniel A. Schwartz, JFB Legal, PLLC, Norfolk, VA for defendants.

    Case Number: 2022-0130-SG

    Former stockholder plausibly alleged fiduciary claims against controller as it received non-ratable benefit from sale of the company and attempted to induce minority stockholders to waive any fiduciary claims to receive their merger consideration.

  • Law Journal Press | Digital Book

    District of Columbia Legal Malpractice Law 2024

    Authors: Shari L. Klevens, Alanna G. Clair

    View this Book

    View more book results for the query "*"

  • Shareholder Representative Serv. LLC v. HPI Holdings, LLC

    Publication Date: 2023-05-09
    Practice Area: Mergers and Acquisitions
    Industry: Investments and Investment Advisory
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Vice Chancellor Fioravanti
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Richard L. Renck, Michael B. Gonen, Duane Morris, LLP, Wilmington, DE; Michael P. Gallagher, Duane Morris, LLP, Philadelphia, PA for plaintiff.
    for defendant: Lisa A. Schmidt, Matthew W. Murphy, Nicole M. Henry, Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A., Wilmington, DE; David P. Whittlesey, Jacob Fields, Shearman & Sterling LLP, Austin, TX for defendant.

    Case Number: 2022-0166-PAF

    Earn-out provision requiring successor company to secure new agreement was not triggered where company merely amended its existing agreement with a customer by rescinding the customer's notice of termination.

  • KnowledgeLake, Inc. v. PFU Am. Group Mgmt., Inc.

    Publication Date: 2023-04-25
    Practice Area: Mergers and Acquisitions
    Industry: Investments and Investment Advisory | Software
    Court: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
    Judge: Judge Greenaway
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:

    Case Number: 21-3207

    Pre-signing efforts to collect past-due invoice did not breach representations in stock purchase agreement and were not outside the ordinary course of business.

  • Merck & Co., Inc. v. Bayer AG

    Publication Date: 2023-04-18
    Practice Area: Mergers and Acquisitions
    Industry: Consumer Products | Pharmaceuticals
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Vice Chancellor Cook
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: James D. Taylor, Jr., Saul Ewing LLP, Wilmington, DE; Amy S. Kline, Saul Ewing LLP, Philadelphia, PA; Joseph D. Lipchitz, Saul Ewing LLP, Boston, MA for plaintiff.
    for defendant: Rudolf Koch, Kyle H. Lachmund, Kevin M. Kidwell, Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Dustin F. Guzior, Y. Carson Zhou, Sullivan & Cromwell LLP, New York, NY for defendant.

    Case Number: 2021-0838-NAC

    Asset purchase agreement unambiguously gave seller of product lines perpetual liability for product liability claims for product sold prior to closing, such that the contract's clause sunsetting certain indemnification rights did not apply to the provision allocating third-party liabilities.

  • In re Pattern Energy Group. Inc. Sec. Litig.

    Publication Date: 2023-04-11
    Practice Area: Mergers and Acquisitions
    Industry: Investments and Investment Advisory
    Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
    Judge: District Judge Noreika
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Sue L. Robinson, Brian E. Farnan, Michael J. Farnan, Farnan LLP, Wilmington, DE; Andrew J. Entwistle, Entwistle & Cappucci LLP, Austin, TX; Vincent R. Cappucci, Arthur V. Nealon, Brendan J. Brodeur, Jonathan H. Beemer, Jessica A. Margulis, Entwistle & Cappucci LLP, New York, NY; Marc M. Seltzer, Krysta Kauble Pachman, Susman Godfrey L.L.P., Los Angeles, CA for plaintiffs.
    for defendant: A. Thompson Bayliss, April M. Ferraro, Christopher Fitzpatrick Cannataro, Abrams & Bayliss LLP, Wilmington, DE; Alan S. Goudiss, K. Mallory Brennan, Sherman & Sterling LLP, New York, NY; Christian E. Myrold, Shearman & Sterling LLP, San Francisco, CA; Matthew D. Stachel, Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP, Wilmington, DE; Jaren Janghorbani, Geoffrey Chepiga, Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP, New York, NY for defendants.

    Case Number: 20-275 (MN) (JLH)

    Court hearing claims under §14(a) properly excluded shareholders who sold their stock after the merger approval vote but before closing, since their alleged pecuniary injury did not directly arise from the challenged merger.

  • Golden v. ShootProof Holdings, LP

    Publication Date: 2023-03-14
    Practice Area: Mergers and Acquisitions
    Industry: E-Commerce
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Vice Chancellor Zurn
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Michael A. Barlow, Abrams & Bayliss LLP, Wilmington, DE; Rollo C. Baker, IV, Margaret Schmidt, Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, New York, NY for plaintiff.
    for defendant: Bradley R. Aronstam, S. Reiko Rogozen, Holly E. Newell, Ross Aronstam & Moritz LLP, Wilmington, DE; Yehudah L. Buchweitz, Joshua S. Amsel, Andrew Cauchi, Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP, New York, NY for defendants.

    Case Number: 2022-0434-MTZ

    Complaint based on false representations made during merger negotiations barred by antireliance and integration clauses of the parties' merger agreement, which did not run afoul of Washington state antiwaiver laws.