Don’t forget you can visit MyAlerts to manage your alerts at any time.
2,503 results for '* court:"Court of Chancery"' You can use Search Constraints to get even better search results
Publication Date: 2021-12-21
Practice Area: Mergers and Acquisitions
Industry: Distribution and Wholesale
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Vice Chancellor Will
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Blake A. Bennett, Cooch and Taylor P.A., Wilmington, DE; W. Scott Holleman, Garam Choe, Bragar Eagel & Squire, P.C., New York, NY for plaintiff.
for defendant: Mark Hurd, Miranda Gilbert, Morris, Nichols, Arsht, & Tunnell LLP, Wilmington, DE; Kayvan Sadeghi, Schiff Hardin LLP, New York, NY; Jin Yan, Schiff Hardin LLP, Chicago, IL for defendant.
Case Number: D69647
The court held that plaintiff did not have standing to file a suit to compel production of books and records of corporation be-cause, at the time of initiating litigation, plaintiff was not a stockholder in the corporation.
Publication Date: 2021-12-21
Practice Area: Corporate Entities
Industry: Software
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Vice Chancellor Slights
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Emily V. Burton, Alberto E. Chávez, Young Conaway Stargatt & Taylor, LLP, Wilmington, DE for plaintiff.
for defendant: Srinivas M. Raju, Angela Lam, Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Michael C. Holmes, Margaret Dunlay Terwey, Meredith S. Jeanes, Vinson & Elkins LLP, Dallas, TX; Christopher E. Duffy, David A. Hoffman, W. Logan Lewis, Vinson & Elkins LLP, New York, NY for defendants.
Case Number: D69646
The court held that 1) defendant's challenge to venue was not persuasive, 2) plaintiff did indeed state a claim for inversion under rules for notice pleading, and 3) plaintiff failed to state a claim for voiding the stock agreement under §205.
Publication Date: 2021-12-14
Practice Area: Corporate Governance
Industry: E-Commerce | Investments and Investment Advisory
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Vice Chancellor Glasscock
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Corinne Elise Amato, Kevin H. Davenport, Jason W. Rigby, Prickett, Jones & Elliott, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Eric L. Zagar, Matthew C. Benedict, Kessler Topaz Meltzer & Check, LLP, Radnor, PA; Patrick C. Lynch, Lynch & Pine, Providence, RI, for plaintiff.
for defendant: Paul J. Lockwood, Jenness E. Parker, Jacob J. Fedechko, Trevor T. Nielsen, Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom, Wilmington, DE; John L. Reed, Ronald N. Brown, III, Peter H. Kyle, Kelly L. Fruend, DLA Piper LLP (US), Wilmington, DE; Rudolf Koch, Matthew D. Perri, Andrew L. Milam, Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Roberto M. Braceras, Caroline H. Bullerjahn, John A. Barker, Dylan E. Schweers, Goodwin Procter LLP, Boston, MA; Kurt M. Heyman, Gillian L. Andrews, Heyman Enerio Gattuso & Hir-zel, LLP, Wilmington, DE; Brandon F. White, Euripides Dalmanieras, Leah S. Rizkallah, Foley Hoag LLP, Boston, MA for defendants.
Case Number: D69638
The court held in this derivative suit that demand was not excused where there was no showing that at least five members of a nine-member board of directors were unable to consider a pre-suit demand. Motions to dismiss granted.
Publication Date: 2021-12-14
Practice Area: Corporate Governance
Industry: Biotechnology | Investments and Investment Advisory
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Vice Chancellor Fioravanti
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Stephen E. Jenkins, F. Troupe Mickler, IV, Ashby & Geddes, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Gregory V. Varallo, Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann LLP, Wilmington, DE; Jeroen van Kwawegen, Daniel E. Meyer, Margaret Sanborn-Lowing, Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann LLP, New York, NY; Gustavo F. Bruckner, Samuel J.Adams, Daryoush Behbood, Pomerantz LLP, New York, NY; Sascha N. Rand, Rollo C. Baker, IV , Silpa Maruri, Jesse Bernstein, Charles H. Sangree, Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP, New York, NY; Stanley D. Bernstein, Matthew Guarnero, Bernstein Liebhard LLP, New York, NY; William J. Fields, Christopher J. Kupka, Samir Shukurov, Fields Kupka & Shukurov LLP, New York, NY for plaintiffs.
for defendant: Brock E. Czeschin, Andrew L. Milam, Richards Layton & Finger, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Riccardo DeBari, Renee Zaytsev, Mendy Pie-karski, Thompson Hine, New York, NY; Matthew F. Davis, Abraham C. Schneider, Potter Anderson & Corroon LLP, Wilmington, DE; Douglas A. Rappaport, Kaitlin D. Shapiro, Elizabeth C. Rosen, Madeleine R. Freeman, Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP, New York, NY for defendants.
Case Number: D69639
The court held that plaintiff shareholders were required to make a demand on the board prior to filing suit. Because they did not make a demand, their claims failed. Motion to dismiss granted.
Publication Date: 2021-12-14
Practice Area: Trusts and Estates
Industry:
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Chancellor McCormick
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Luke W. Mette, Jonathan M. Stemerman, Armstrong Teasdale LLP, Wilmington,DE; John A. Sten, Jason C. Moreau, Allison McFar-land, Armstrong Teasdale LLP, Boston, MA for petitioner.
for defendant: Henry E. Gallagher, Jr., Gregory J. Weinig, Shaun M. Kelly, Jarrett W. Horowitz, Connolly Gallagher LLP, Wilmington, DE; Lazar P. Raynal, Michael A. Lombardo, Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP, Chicago, IL, for respondents.
Case Number: D69640
The court held that petitioner succeeded in stating a claim for reformation of trust agreement based on both mistake and knowing silence on the part of petitioner's brother. Motion to dismiss these claims denied. However, petitioner failed to state a claim for removal of fiduciary and for an accounting. Motion to dismiss these claims granted.
Law Journal Press | Digital Book
Authors: A Project of The Dallas Bar Association
View this BookView more book results for the query "*"
Publication Date: 2021-12-07
Practice Area: Corporate Governance
Industry: E-Commerce | Investments and Investment Advisory | Technology Media and Telecom
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Vice Chancellor Glasscock
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Neal C. Belgam, Jason Z. Miller, Michael C. Wagner, Smith, Katzenstein & Jenkins LLP, Wilmington, DE; Christopher M. Caparelli, Torys LLP, New York, NY for plaintiff.
for defendant: Thomas G. Macauley, Macauley LLC, Wilmington, DE; Euripides D. Dalmanieras, Foley Hoag LLP, Boston, MA for defendant.
Case Number: D69631
Where a corporation failed to update its stock ledger after acknowledging a convertible note holder's conversion into preferred stock, court could look to extrinsic evidence beyond the ledger to determine standing for a §220 demand.
Publication Date: 2021-11-30
Practice Area: Contracts
Industry: Energy | Investments and Investment Advisory
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Vice Chancellor Laster
Attorneys: For plaintiff: A. Thompson Bayliss, J. Peter Shindel, Jr., Daniel G. Paterno, Eric A. Veres, Samuel D. Cordle, Abrams & Bayliss LLP, Wilmington, DE for plaintiffs.
for defendant: Srinivas M. Raju, Blake Rohrbacher, Matthew D. Perri, John M. O’Toole, Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Rolin P. Bissell, Young Conaway Stargatt & Taylor LLP, Wilmington, DE; Daniel A. Mason, Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP, Wilmington, DE; Stephen P. Lamb, Andrew G. Gordon, Harris Fischman, Robert N. Kravitz, Carter E. Greenbaum, Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP, New York, NY; Lawrence Portnoy, Charles S. Duggan, Gina Cora, Davis Polk & Wardwell LLP, New York, NY, for defendants.
Case Number: D69622
The court held that the General Partner breached the partnership agreement by exercising the call right without first satisfy-ing the Opinion Condition or the Acceptability Condition.
Publication Date: 2021-11-23
Practice Area: Attorney Compensation
Industry: Investments and Investment Advisory | Legal Services | Technology Media and Telecom
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Vice Chancellor Glasscock
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Gregory V. Varallo, Andrew E. Blumberg, Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann LLP, Wilmington, DE; Michael Hanrahan, Kevin H. Davenport, Mary S. Thomas, Prickett, Jones & Elliott, P.A.; Mark Lebovitch, Jacqueline Y. Ma, Daniel E. Meyer, Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann LLP, New York, NY; Lee D. Rudy, Eric L. Zagar, Christopher M. Windover, Matthew C. Benedict, Kessler Topaz Meltzer & Check, LLP, Randor, PA; Robert D.Klausner, Klausner Kaufman Jensen & Levinson, P.A., Plantation, FL; Aaron T. Morris, Morris Kandinov LLP, Stowe, VT for plaintiffs.
for defendant: Robert S. Saunders, Joseph O. Larkin, Matthew P. Majarian, Ryan M. Lindsay, Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP, Wilmington, DE; Richard B. Harper, Thomas E. O’Brien, Vern Cassin, Baker Botts LLP, New York, NY; Kenneth J. Nachbar, Megan W. Cascio, Thomas P. Will, Sarah P. Kaboly, Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP, Wilmington, DE; Douglas D. Herrmann, Emily L. Wheatley, Troutman Pepper Hamilton Sanders LLP, Wilmington, DE for defendants.
Case Number: D69614
The court held that plaintiffs were entitled to a mootness fee in the amount of 9 million dollars.
Publication Date: 2021-11-16
Practice Area: Corporate Governance
Industry: Investments and Investment Advisory | Pharmaceuticals
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Vice Chancellor Will
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Brian E. Farnan, Michael J. Farnan, Farnan LLP, Wilmington, DE; Steven J. Purcell, Douglas E. Julie, Robert H. Lefkowitz, Anisha Mirchandani, Purcell Julie & Lefkowitz LLP, New York, NY for plaintiffs.
for defendant: Blake Rohrbacher, Alexander M. Krischik, Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Caroline H. Bullerjahn, Goodwin Procter LLP, Boston, MA; Peter B. Ladig, Brett M. McCartney, Bayard P.A., Wilmington, DE for defendants.
Case Number: D69606
The court held that plaintiffs' amended complaint satisfied pleading requirements for a claim of breach of fiduciary duty concerning board approval and implementation of charter amendments where 1) plaintiffs made a valid demand on the board to correct a violation and 2) the allegations supported an inference that the demand was wrongfully refused.
Publication Date: 2021-11-16
Practice Area: Contracts
Industry: Financial Services and Banking | Consulting | Software
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Vice Chancellor Fioravanti
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Thad J. Bracegirdle, Bayard, P.A., Wilmington, DE; David A. Battaglia, Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP, Los Angeles, CA for plaintiff.
for defendant: Jeffrey L. Moyer, Travis S. Hunter, Nicole K. Pedi, Richards Layton & Finger, P.A., Wilmington, DE for defendant.
Case Number: D69608
The court held that plaintiff failed to show that defendant engaged in contemptuous conduct constituting a violation of a previously issued court order under the preponderance of the evidence standard for contempt claims.
Legal Speak is a weekly podcast that makes sense of what’s happening in the legal industry.
1 minute read