Don’t forget you can visit MyAlerts to manage your alerts at any time.
527 results for '* industry:"Investments and Investment Advisory"' You can use Search Constraints to get even better search results
Publication Date: 2022-05-03
Practice Area: Corporate Entities
Industry: Investments and Investment Advisory | Technology Media and Telecom
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Vice Chancellor Laster
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Paul J. Lockwood, Arthur R. Bookout, Matthew P. Majarian, Kathryn S. Bartolacci, Gregory P. Ranzini, Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP, Wilmington, DE; David E. Ross, Ross Aronstam & Moritz LLP, Wilmington, DE for petitioner.
for defendant: Christopher P. Simon, Kevin S. Mann, David G. Holmes, Cross & Simon, LLC, Wilmington DE; E.F. Anthony Merchant, Q.C., Merchant Law Group LLP, Regina, Saskatchewan for claimant.
Case Number: D69805
Dissolved company was required to retain a security sufficient to cover the full amount of per se damages that could be imposed under statutory law governing pending litigation.
Publication Date: 2022-04-26
Practice Area: Bankruptcy
Industry: Investments and Investment Advisory
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Judge: Per Curiam
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: D69793
Shareholder's appeal of Chapter 11 plan denied where equity holders lacked standing where debtor would not have any assets for equity holders after satisfying claims of its creditors.
Publication Date: 2022-04-26
Practice Area: Contracts
Industry: Investments and Investment Advisory
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Vice Chancellor Glasscock
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Stephen B. Brauerman, Jason C. Jowers, Sarah T. Andrade, Justin C. Barrett, Bayard P.A. Wilmington, DE for plaintiffs.
for defendant: Rudolf Koch, Kyle Lachmund, Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Daniel Lynch, Lynch Thompson LLP, Chicago, IL for defendant.
Case Number: D69790
The court held that any harm incurred by plaintiffs by allowing the forum selection cause issue to be litigated in Illinois was of their own making such that plaintiffs should not be allowed to enjoin the Illinois action.
Publication Date: 2022-04-19
Practice Area: Mergers and Acquisitions
Industry: Investments and Investment Advisory
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Vice Chancellor Glasscock
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Eric D. Selden, Anthony M. Calvano, Ross Aronstam & Moritz LLP, Wilmington, DE; Cameron M. Hancock, Adam D. Wahlquist, Kirton McConkie, Salt Lake City, UT for plaintiffs.
for defendant: Peter B. Ladig, Bayard, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Mark A. Harmon, Erin N. Teske, Hodgson Russ LLP, New York, NY; P. Clarkson Collins, Jr., K. Tyler O'Connell, Morris James LLP, Wilmington, DE; Anna Rotman, Kirkland & Ellis LLP, Houston, TX for defendants.
Case Number: D69783
The court, in this diverted merger consideration case, determined that defendant was not bound by a contract's forum selection clause because it was not a party to the contract and did not have sufficient contacts with Delaware to confer jurisdiction under the long-arm statute.
Publication Date: 2022-04-12
Practice Area: Securities Litigation
Industry: Entertainment and Leisure | Investments and Investment Advisory
Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
Judge: District Judge Bibas
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Joseph Benedict Cicero, Aidan T. Hamilton, Gregory Erich Stuhlman, Chipman Brown Cicero & Cole, LLP, Wilmington, DE; Matthew J. Reynolds, Sara G. Wilcox, Huth Reynolds LLP, New York, NY & Denver, CO; Ned C. Weinberger, Labaton Sucharow LLP, Wilmington, DE for plaintiffs.
for defendant: Daniel A. O’Brien, Brian L. Schwalb, Venable LLP, Wilmington, DE for defendants.
Case Number: D69779
Minority stockholders plausibly alleged that controlling shareholder used insider knowledge to mislead the minority stockholders into being bought out for an unfair price where the now wholly owned company represented almost all the attributed value of the controlling shareholder, which soon after went public for a much higher price than the minority stockholders sold out for.
Law Journal Press | Digital Book
Authors:
View this BookView more book results for the query "*"
Publication Date: 2022-04-12
Practice Area: Securities Litigation
Industry: Energy | 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. Kirby, Abrams & Bayliss LLP, Wilmington, DE; Alan S. Goudiss, K. Mallory Brennan, Shearman & Sterling LLP, New York, NY; Christina E. Myrold, Shearman & Sterling LLP, San Francisco, CA for defendants.
Case Number: D69781
Motion to dismiss Exchange Act violations denied where plaintiffs plausibly alleged that defendant board had acknowledged that a competing merger offer constituted a better value and would provide stockholders with a higher price, and knew at the time of voting to approve another offer that the competing bidder was willing to continue discussing more favorable terms of merger.
Publication Date: 2022-03-29
Practice Area: Insurance Litigation
Industry: Insurance | Investments and Investment Advisory
Court: Delaware Superior Court
Judge: Judge Johnston
Attorneys: For plaintiff: David J. Baldwin, Peter C. McGivney, Berger Harris LLP, Wilmington, DE; Bernard P. Bell, Tab R. Turano, Miller Friel PLLC, Washington, DC for plaintiff.
for defendant: Gregory F. Fischer, Cozen O'Connor, Wilmington, DE; Angelo G. Savino, Rafael Rivera, Jr., Cozen O'Connor, New York, NY for defendants.
Case Number: D69762
The court held that the subject appraisal action was not a claim for a wrongful act such that the insurer was not obligated to provide coverage or reimburse defense costs.
Publication Date: 2022-03-22
Practice Area: Trusts and Estates
Industry: Investments and Investment Advisory
Court: Delaware Superior Court
Judge: Judge Wharton
Attorneys: For plaintiff: James S. Green, Jr., Jared T. Green, Seitz, Van Ogtrop & Green, P.A., Wilmington, DE for plaintiffs Edward F. Brovelli, Jr., individually, and as trustee of The Brovelli Family Trust 2A and defendant USA Carrington Park 20, LLC.
for defendant: Gregory F. Fischer, Cozen O’Connor, Wilmington, DE; John J. Sullivan, Cozen O’Connor, New York, NY, for defendants Independence Realty Operating Partnership, LP, Independence Realty Trust, Inc., Independence Realty Advisors, LLC, IRT Carrington Apartments Owner, LLC and plaintiffs Independent Realty Trust, Inc., and Independence Realty Operating Partnership, LP.
Case Number: D69751
The court held the trust had standing to sue defendants because defendant Carrington had transferred its right to sue to the trust, that Brovelli as an individual did not have standing to sue because he was not a party to any of the subject contracts, that defendants who were not parties to the subject contracts should be dismissed, and that whether damages were direct or consequential had issues of fact and were not appropriate for a motion to dismiss.
Publication Date: 2022-03-22
Practice Area: Corporate Entities
Industry: Biotechnology | Investments and Investment Advisory
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Vice Chancellor Will
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Kenneth J. Nachbar, S. Mark Hurd, Sara Toscano, Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP, Wilmington, DE; Aaron Miner, Arnold & Porter, New York, NY for plaintiff.
for defendant: Matthew F. Davis, Aaron R. Sims, Callan R. Jackson, Potter Anderson & Corroon LLP, Wilmington, DE; Jeffrey W. Shields, Shields Law Offices, Irvine, CA for defendant.
Case Number: D69754
The court held that Krauss was entitled to advancement for fees associated with her response to the SEC subpoenas, her de-fense of the direct actions, and her prosecution of her affirmative defenses and compulsory counterclaims because those claims flowed from her position as a director and officer of KBL.
Publication Date: 2022-03-22
Practice Area: Trusts and Estates
Industry: Investments and Investment Advisory
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Judge: Judge Restrepo
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: D69750
The court found that plaintiff waived fiduciary claims about certain investments through a direct statement of waiver, the issue of whether excess fees was allowed by the trust agreement was time-barred, plaintiff failed to state a claim for proximate cause regarding whether defendant should have provided tax planning to plaintiff, former trustee was allowed by the trust agreement to act as both trustee and advisor, and the exculpation clause prohibited the equitable fraud claim.
Legal Speak is a weekly podcast that makes sense of what’s happening in the legal industry.
1 minute read