• Gluhic-Popovic v. American Med. Sys.

    Publication Date: 2019-10-30
    Practice Area: Products Liability
    Industry: Health Care | Manufacturing
    Court: Delaware Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Johnston
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Robert J. Leoni, Shelsby & Leoni, Stanton, DE; Jeffrey Brinen, Kutner Brinen, P.C., Denver CO; Shanin Specter and Lee B. Balefsky, Kline & Specter, P.C., Philadelphia, PA for plaintiff.
    for defendant: Brian M. Rostocki, Stephen J. McConnell and Justin M. Forcier, Reed Smith LLP, Wilmington, DE for defendants.

    Case Number: D68753

    Plaintiff had standing to file this products liability case even though she was a debtor in a Chapter 13 bankruptcy proceeding.

  • Saez v. Nephrology Assoc., P.A.

    Publication Date: 2019-10-30
    Practice Area: Employment Litigation
    Industry: Health Care | Recruitment and Staffing
    Court: Delaware Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Cooch
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Daniel C. Herr, Law Office of Daniel C. Herr, Wilmington, DE for plaintiff.
    for defendant: Alan D. Albert, O’Hagan Meyer PLLC, Wilmington, DE for defendant.

    Case Number: D68757

    An employer had the right to direct, control and supervise a doctor's work under the terms of an employment agreement.

  • Sheldon v. Pinto Tech. Ventures, L.P.

    Publication Date: 2019-10-23
    Practice Area: Corporate Governance
    Industry: Health Care | Investments and Investment Advisory | Manufacturing
    Court: Delaware Supreme Court
    Judge: Justice Valihura
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Thad J. Bracegirdle, Scott B. Czerwonka, Wilks, Lukoff & Bracegirdle, LLC, Wilmington, DE for plaintiffs.
    for defendant: Bruce E. Jameson, Samuel L. Closic, Prickett, Jones & Elliott, P.A., Wilmington, DE; B. Russell Horton, Gary L. Lewis, George Brothers Kincaid & Horton LLP, Austin, TX for Pinto, Rivervest and Bay City Capital defendants. Brian C. Ralston, Jacqueline A. Rogers, Potter Anderson Corroon LLP, Wilmington, DE; Danny David, Rebeca Huddle, Baker Botts L.L.P., Houston, TX for defendants Terry and Walker.

    Case Number: D68749

    Plaintiffs failed to adequately allege the existence of a control group in this breach of fiduciary duty matter, so the chancery court properly dismissed the complaint. Affirmed.

  • Jackson v. Ivens

    Publication Date: 2019-10-09
    Practice Area: Civil Rights
    Industry: Health Care | State and Local Government
    Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
    Judge: District Judge Stark
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Stuart B. Drowos, Department of Justice, Wilmington, DE for state defendants.
    for defendant: Daniel A. Griffith, Whiteford, Taylor & Preston L.L.C., Wilmington, DE for Correctional Medical Services defendants. Karine Sarkisian, White and Williams, Wilmington, DE for defendants.

    Case Number: D68729

    Plaintiff did not file his motion for relief from a judgment within a reasonable time, and he failed to demonstrate that "newly discovered evidence" would have changed the outcome at trial, or that a grave miscarriage of justice occurred.

  • Finom Mgmt. GMBH v. Celerion Holdco, LLC

    Publication Date: 2019-10-02
    Practice Area: Corporate Entities
    Industry: Health Care | Investments and Investment Advisory | Pharmaceuticals
    Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
    Judge: District Judge Stark
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Christopher J. Day, Day Law Group, LLC, Wilmington, DE; Joseph M. Donley, Peter Blume and Christopher M. Brubaker, Clark Hill PLC, Philadelphia, PA for plaintiffs.
    for defendant: Travis S. Hunter, Tyler E. Cragg and Alexandra M. Ewing, Richards Layton & Finger, P.A., Wilmington, DE for defendants.

    Case Number: D68721

    Plaintiffs adequately alleged that defendants engaged in bad faith violations of the parties' redemption agreement, but the court dismissed the remainder of plaintiffs' claim.

  • Law Journal Press | Digital Book

    New York Employment Law 2023

    Authors: Daniel A. Cohen, Joshua Feinstein

    View this Book

    View more book results for the query "*"

  • Gray v. Kirkwood Dental Assoc., P.A.

    Publication Date: 2019-10-02
    Practice Area: Employment Litigation
    Industry: Health Care
    Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
    Judge: District Judge Stark
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Michelle D. Allen and Caitlyn E. Quinn, Allen & Assoc., Wilmington, DE for plaintiff.
    for defendant: Kristen S. Swift and Robert D. Cecil, Jr., Tybout, Redfearn & Pell, Wilmington, DE for defendant.

    Case Number: D68722

    The court granted an employer's motion for summary judgment on two claims by a former employee, but it denied summary judgment on a federal discrimination claim because the employee provided sufficient circumstantial evidence that the employer terminated her for discriminatory reasons due to her age.

  • Eagle Force Holdings, LLC v. Campbell

    Publication Date: 2019-09-11
    Practice Area: Corporate Entities
    Industry: Health Care | Investments and Investment Advisory
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Vice Chancellor Montgomery-Reeves
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Frank E. Noyes, II, Offit Kurman, P.A., Wilmington, DE, Harold M. Walter and Angela D. Pallozzi, Offit Kurman, P.A., Baltimore, MD for plaintiffs.
    for defendant: David L. Finger, Finger & Slanina, LLC, Wilmington, DE, for defendant.

    Case Number: D68695

    Parties' prior practice of signing draft transaction documents to acknowledge receipt overcame presumption that signature manifested intent to be contractually bound, such that plaintiffs failed to prove defendant's intent to be bound to agreements that provided choice of forum clause.

  • NuVasive, Inc. v. Miles

    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.

  • Avande, Inc. v. Evans

    Publication Date: 2019-08-28
    Practice Area: Labor Law
    Industry: Accounting | Health Care | Insurance
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Chancellor Bouchard
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Thad. J. Bracegirdle and Julie M. O’Dell, Wilks, Lukoff & Bracegirdle LLC, Wilmington, DE, Jerome R. Bowen, Bowen Law Offices, Las Vegas, NV for plaintiff.
    for defendant: Sean J. Bellew, Bellew, LLC, Wilmington, DE for defendants.

    Case Number: D68678

    Company could force former CEO to provide accounting of transactions with company owned by the CEO, but failed to make prima facie case to require CEO to undertake accounting of all other challenged transactions since many other company employees were authorized to make expenditures.

  • Planned Parenthood of Delaware, Inc. v. Corbin

    Publication Date: 2019-08-28
    Practice Area: Administrative Law
    Industry: Health Care | Non-Profit
    Court: Delaware Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Butler
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Jennifer Gimler Brady and Jennier Penberthy Buckley, Potter Anderson & Corroon, LLP for Planned Parenthood of Delaware, Inc.
    for defendant: Scott T. Earle and Zachary A. Silverstein, Zarwin Baum Devito Kaplan Schaer Toddy, P.C. for Yolanda Corbin. Daniel C. Mul-veny for the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Bd.

    Case Number: D68681

    An appeals board created an unfair process when it restricted arguments on appeal, unfairly benefitting one party and preju-dicing the other.