Don’t forget you can visit MyAlerts to manage your alerts at any time.
435 results for '* industry:"Health Care"' You can use Search Constraints to get even better search results
Publication Date: 2018-06-20
Practice Area: Administrative Law
Industry: Health Care
Court: Delaware Superior Court
Judge: Judge Cooch
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Heather A. Long for appellant Davis
for defendant: Morgan A. Sack for appellee HealthSouth.
Case Number: D68185
The Industrial Accident Board was free to choose between conflicting medical opinions, and its decision was supported by substantial evidence.
Publication Date: 2018-05-23
Practice Area: Expert Witnesses | Medical Malpractice
Industry: Health Care
Court: Delaware Superior Court
Judge: Judge Rocanelli
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: D68155
Genuine issues of material fact existed as to comparative negligence and mitigation, so the court denied a motion for summary judgment in this medical negligence case.
Publication Date: 2018-05-09
Practice Area: Class Actions | Insurance Law
Industry: Health Care | Insurance
Court: Delaware Superior Court
Judge: Judge Davis
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Richard H. Cross, Jr., Christopher P. Simon, Cross & Simon, LLC, Wilmington, DE, attorneys for plaintiffs
for defendant: Paul A. Bradley, Maron Marvel Bradley Anderson & Tardy, LLC, Wilmington, DE; George M. Church, Miles & Stockbridge, PC, Baltimore, MD; Meloney Perry, Perry Law, PC, Dallas, TX, attorneys for defendant.
Case Number: D68135
Motion to dismiss putative class action denied where court could not definitively determine that plaintiffs could not establish damage calculation method that would predominate over proposed class.
Publication Date: 2018-04-11
Practice Area: Employment Litigation | Personal Injury
Industry: Health Care
Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
Judge: District Judge Andrews
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Dean A. Campbell for plaintiffs
for defendant: Gregory D. Stewart for defendants.
Case Number: D68108
A former employee was entitled to relief on her claim for breach of fiduciary duty because the employer did not allege an assignment of her incentive benefits, but her claim for interference with business relations was in-sufficient.
Publication Date: 2018-03-14
Practice Area: Corporate Governance
Industry: Health Care
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Vice Chancellor Montgomery-Reeves
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Nathan A. Cook, Jeroen van Kwawegen, David MacIsaac, Norman Berman, Nathaniel L Orenstein, Mark A. Delaney, Jessica Zeldin and Bradford P. deLeeuw for plaintiffs;
for defendant: R. Judson Scaggs, Jr., Lauren Neal Bennett and Jason Z. Miller for defendant.
Case Number: D68075
Documents relating to a separate qui tam proceeding provided a credible basis for stockholders to request corporate books and records for the purpose of investigating mismanagement or wrongdoing.
Law Journal Press | Digital Book
Authors:
View this BookView more book results for the query "*"
Publication Date: 2018-03-07
Practice Area: Discovery | Mergers and Acquisitions
Industry: Consulting | Health Care
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Vice Chancellor Laster
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Stuart M. Grant, Michael J. Barry, Jeff A. Almeida, Kimberly A. Evans, Rebecca Musarra, Vincent R. Cappucci and Jordan A. Cortez for petitioners
for defendant: Raymond J. DiCamillo, Kevin M. Gallagher, Ryan P. Durkin, Michele D. Johnson and Kristin N. Murphy for respondent.
Case Number: D68068
Parties who provided late discovery without adequate explanation engaged in discovery abuse.
Publication Date: 2018-03-07
Practice Area: Administrative Law
Industry: Health Care
Court: Delaware Superior Court
Judge: Judge Parkins
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Daniel A. Griffith for appellant
for defendant: Stacey X. Stewart for appellee.
Case Number: D68066
A physician whose license had been revoked had little chance of success on the merits, and a stay would have prevented authorities in another state from learning of issues that could have affected the health and safety of the physicians patients in that state.
Publication Date: 2018-03-07
Practice Area: Corporate Governance | Mergers and Acquisitions
Industry: Health Care
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Vice Chancellor Slights
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Jeffrey Gorris, Christopher Foulds, and Christopher Quinn, Friedlander & Gorris P.A., Wilmington, DE; David Wales, David MacIssac, and John Vielandi, Bernstein Litowtiz Berger & Grossman LLP, New York, NY; Adam Warden, Saxena White P.A., Boca Raton, FL; Steven B. Singer and Joshua H. Saltzman, Saxena White P.A., White Plains, NY; J. Elazar Fruchter, Wohl & Fruchter LLP, New York, NY, attorneys for plaintiff
for defendant: Robert S. Saunders, Ronald N. Brown, III, Sarah R. Martin, and Elisa M.C. Klein, Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP, Wilmington, DE, attorneys for defendants.
Case Number: D68064
Derivative complaint not dismissed where plaintiff pled facts of directors conflicts of interest with corporation on the other side of the challenged transaction supporting a reasonable doubt as to whether board was disinterested or independent, which constituted a non-exculpated claim.
Publication Date: 2018-02-28
Practice Area: Medical Malpractice
Industry: Health Care
Court: Delaware Superior Court
Judge: Judge Medinilla
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Ben T. Castle and Bruce L. Hudson for plaintiffs
for defendant: Richard Galperin and Joshua H. Meyeroff for defendants.
Case Number: D68057
Defendants in medical malpractice case did not demonstrate that testimony by plaintiffs expert as to the standard of care was improper, or that the court incorrectly admitted statistical evidence.
Publication Date: 2018-02-14
Practice Area: Patent Litigation
Industry: Consumer Products | Health Care
Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
Judge: District Judge Andrews
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Colm F. Connolly, David W. Marston, Jr., Jody C. Barillare, and John V. Goodman, Morgan Lewis & Bockius LLP, Wimington, DE; Thomas B. Kenworthy and Julie S. Goldemberg, Morgan Lewis & Bockius LLP, Philadelphia, PA; Raymond R. Moser, Jr., Moser Taboada, Shrewsbury, NJ, attorneys for plaintiff
for defendant: Adam W. Poff and Pilar G. Kraman, Young Conaway Stargatt & Taylor, LLP, Wilimington, DE; Douglas J. Nash, John D. Cook, Kathryn D. Cornish, Barclay Damon, LLP, Syracuse, NY, attorneys for defendant.
Case Number: D68038
Willful infringement and enhanced damages claim denied where defendants willful blindness to its products possible infringement of plaintiffs patents was at most a substitute for knowledge and did not constitute sufficient egregious behavior to support enhanced damages.
Legal Speak is a weekly podcast that makes sense of what’s happening in the legal industry.
1 minute read