Filter This View

  • BCIM Strategic Value Master Fund LP v. HFF, Inc.

    Publication Date: 2022-02-15
    Practice Area: Deals and Transactions
    Industry: Financial Services and Banking | Investments and Investment Advisory | Real Estate
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Vice Chancellor Laster
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: David J. Margules, Elizabeth A. Sloan, Jessica C. Watt, Ballard Spahr LLP, Wilmington, DE; Stephen Brauerman, Emily A. Letcher, Bayard PA, Wilmington, DE; William B. Igoe, Philadelphia, PA for petitioner.
    for defendant: William M. Lafferty, Ryan D. Stottmann, Sarah P. Kaboly, Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP, Wilmington DE; Marc J. Sonnenfeld, Laura H. McNally, Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP, Philadelphia, PA for respondent.
    Case Number: D69710

    The court, in the appraisal action, determined the fair value of the respondent and gave heavy weight to the deal price.

  • Galindo v. Stover

    Publication Date: 2022-02-08
    Practice Area: Mergers and Acquisitions
    Industry: Energy | Investments and Investment Advisory
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Vice Chancellor Glasscock
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Blake A. Bennett, Cooch and Taylor, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Juan E. Monteverde, Monteverde & Associates PC, New York, NY for plaintiffs.
    for defendant: Kenneth J. Nachbar, Alexandra M. Cumings, Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP, Wilmington, DE; Robert S. Harrell, Charles S. Kelley, Joseph De Simone, Michael Rayfield, Mayer Brown LLP, New York, NY for defendants.
    Case Number: D69702

    The court held that the business judgment rule applied to a merger that had been approved by a majority of stockholders.

  • In Re: AMC Investors, LLC

    Publication Date: 2022-02-08
    Practice Area: Bankruptcy
    Industry: Investments and Investment Advisory
    Court: U.S. Bankruptcy Court
    Judge: Judge Sontchi
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Mark D. Collins, Marcos A. Ramos, Cory D. Kandstein, Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Mitchell A. Karlan, Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP, New York, NY for plaintiff.
    for defendant: Curtis S. Miller, Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP, Wilmington, DE; Brian P. Miller, Samantha J. Kavanaugh, James A. Bombulie, Akerman LLP, Miami, FL for defendants.
    Case Number: D69704

    Breach of fiduciary duty claims were untimely where plaintiffs were on notice of the claims over a decade prior as the same claims had been asserted against several of the plaintiffs in a related action.

  • Simons v. Brookfield Asset Mgmt. Inc.

    Publication Date: 2022-02-08
    Practice Area: Corporate Governance
    Industry: Investments and Investment Advisory | Manufacturing
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Chancellor McCormick
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Kevin H. Davenport, Samuel L. Closic, Eric J. Juray, Prickett, Jones & Elliott, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Brian J. Robbins, Gregory Del Gaizo, Stephen J. Oddo, Eric M.Carrino, Robbins LLP, San Diego, CA for plaintiff.
    for defendant: Bradley R. Aronstam, R. Garrett Rice, Ross Aronstam & Moritz LLP, Wilmington, DE; Geoffrey J. Ritts, Jones Day, Cleveland, OH; Marjorie P. Duffy, Jones Day, Columbus, OH; Blake Rohrbacher, Alexander M. Krischik, Andrew L. Milam, Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Lawrence Portnoy, Davis Polk &Wardwell LLP, New York, NY for defendants.
    Case Number: D69705

    The court held that a majority of the board at the time of filing were outside directors who did not receive a material personal benefit from the challenged transaction, did not face a substantial likelihood of liability because of an exculpation provision, and did not lack independence from the controlling stockholder who was a party to the challenged transaction.

  • Levy Family Investors, LLC v. Oars + Alps LLC

    Publication Date: 2022-02-08
    Practice Area: Contracts
    Industry: Consumer Products | Investments and Investment Advisory
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Vice Chancellor Slights
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Rudolf Koch, Matthew D. Perri, Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Greg Shinall, Michael G. Dickler, Sperling & Slater, P.C., Chicago, IL for plaintiffs.
    for defendant: Robert S. Saunders, Sarah R. Martin, Michelle L. Davis, Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP, Wilmington, DE; Ryan D. Stottmann, Miranda N. Gilbert, Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP, Wilmington, DE; Tamir Young, Studin Young PC, Hauppauge, NY; Peter B. Ladig, Elizabeth A. Powers, Sarah T. Andrade, Bayard, P.A., Wilmington, DE for defendants.
    Case Number: D69703

    The court held that because there were two competing and reasonable interpretations of certain contract language, the contract was ambiguous, and the ambiguity barred a motion to dismiss as a matter of law or on the pleadings.

  • Law Journal Press | Digital Book

    Massachusetts Legal Ethics & Malpractice 2017

    Authors: James S. Bolan, Sara N. Holden

    View this Book

    View more book results for the query "*"

  • In re: Resolute Energy Corp. Sec. Litig.

    Publication Date: 2022-02-08
    Practice Area: Mergers and Acquisitions
    Industry: Energy | Investments and Investment Advisory
    Court: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
    Judge: Judge Krause
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: D69709

    Failure to explain alleged "actual value" of company shares or how the company's stockholders could have achieved that value in a merger transaction was fatal to fraud/breach of fiduciary duty claim.

  • Weinstein v. Luxeyard, Inc.

    Publication Date: 2022-02-01
    Practice Area: Contracts
    Industry: Investments and Investment Advisory | Retail
    Court: Delaware Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Adams
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Julia B. Klein, Klein, LLC, Wilmington, DE, for plaintiffs.
    for defendant: Ann M. Kashishian, Kashishian Law, LLC, Wilmington, DE; Jack J. Nichols, Jack J. Nichols, P.C., Houston, TX for defendant.
    Case Number: D69697

    The court held that the convertible debentures at issue were conditional because they contained an express condition for payment which made the agreement a contract and not a negotiable instrument.

  • In Re Multiplan Corp. Stockholders' Litig.

    Publication Date: 2022-01-18
    Practice Area: Corporate Governance
    Industry: Investments and Investment Advisory
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Vice Chancellor Will
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Gregory V. Varallo, Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann LLP, Wilmington, DE; Mark Lebovitch, Daniel E. Meyer, Margaret Sanborn- Lowing, Joseph W. Caputo, Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann LLP, New York, NY for plaintiffs.
    for defendant: Raymond J. DiCamillo, Kevin M. Gallagher, Matthew D. Perri, Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Jonathan K. Youngwood, Rachel S. Sparks Bradley, Simpson Thacher & Bartlett LLP, New York, NY; Stephen P. Blake, Simpson Thacher & Bartlett LLP, Palo Alto, CA; Bradley R. Aronstam, S. Michael Sirkin, Ross Aronstam & Moritz LLP, Wilmington, DE; John A. Neuwirth, Joshua S. Amsel, Evert J. Christensen, Jr., Matthew S. Connors, Nicole E. Prunetti, Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP, New York, NY for defendants.
    Case Number: D69679

    The court found that plaintiff's claim was direct, not derivative, the claims were not exclusively contractual, and that the claims were not holder claims predicated on stockholder inaction.

  • Tygon Peak Capital Mgt., LLC v. Mobile Inv. Investco Co., LLC

    Publication Date: 2022-01-18
    Practice Area: Corporate Governance
    Industry: Investments and Investment Advisory
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Vice Chancellor Zurn
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Marc S. Casarino, Karine Sarkisian, Kelly Rowe, White and Williams LLP, Wilmington, DE; Jarrod D. Shaw and Keisha O. Coleman, McGuire Woods LLP, Pittsburgh, PA, for plaintiff.
    for defendant: Kevin M. Gallagher, Angela Lam, Christian C.F. Roberts, Richards, Layton, & Finger, P.A., Wilmington, DE for defendants.
    Case Number: D69681

    The court held that plaintiff venture capital firm failed to state claims against its investors for tort and quasi-contract claims.

  • In re Kraft Heinz Co.

    Publication Date: 2021-12-28
    Practice Area: Corporate Governance
    Industry: Food and Beverage | Investments and Investment Advisory
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Vice Chancellor Will
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Joel Friedlander, Jeffrey Gorris, Christopher M. Foulds, Friedlander & Gorris P.A., Wilmington, DE; P. Bradford deLeeuw, Deleeuw Law LLC, Wilmington, DE; David A. Jenkins, Robert K. Beste III, Smith, Katzenstein & Jenkins LLP, Wilmington, DE; Eduard Korsinsky, Gregory M. Nespole, Nicholas I. Porritt, Daniel Tepper, Levi & Korsinsky LLP, New York, NY; Jeffrey S. Abraham, Mitchell M. Z. Twersky, Atara Hirsch, Michael J. Klein, Abraham, Fruchter & Twersky, LLP, New York, NY; Lawrence P. Eagel, W. Scott Holleman, Melissa A. Fortunato, Marion C. Passmore, Bragar Eagel & Squire, P.C., New York, NY; Michael VanOverbeke, Vanoverbeke, Michaud & Timmony, P.C., Detroit, MI; Deborah Sturman, Sturman LLC, New York, NY for plaintiffs.
    for defendant: Michael A. Pittenger, Jacqueline A. Rogers, Caneel Radinson-Blasucci, Potter Anderson & Corroon LLP, Wilmington, DE; Sandra C. Goldstein, Stefan Atkinson, Kevin M. Neylan, Jr., Kirkland & Ellis LLP, New York, NY; Matthew D. Stachel, Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP, Wilmington, DE; Daniel J. Kramer, Andrew J. Ehrlich, William A. Clareman, Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP, New York, NY for defendants.
    Case Number: D69657

    The court held that plaintiffs failed to plead sufficient allegations that a majority of the demand board was interested in a stock sale transaction such that demand would be excused.