Don’t forget you can visit MyAlerts to manage your alerts at any time.
50 results for '* judge:"Justice Seitz"' You can use Search Constraints to get even better search results
Publication Date: 2022-02-01
Practice Area: Communications and Media
Industry: Consulting | Technology Media and Telecom
Court: Delaware Supreme Court
Judge: Justice Seitz
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Sean J. Bellew, Bellew LLC, Wilmington, DE; Todd V. McMurtry, Hemmer DeFrank Wessels, PLLC, Ft. Mitchell, KY; K. Lawson Pedigo, Miller Keffer & Pedigo, PLLC, Dallas, TX for plaintiff below, appellant.
for defendant: T. Brad Davey, Jonathan A. Choa, Potter Anderson & Corroon LLP, Wilmington, DE; Elbert Lin, David M. Parker, Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP, Richmond, VA; Jonathan D. Reichman, Jennifer L. Bloom, Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP, New York, NY, for defendant below, appellee.
Case Number: D69696
The court held that plaintiff was required to plead actual malice in his defamation suit against defendant who owned online news organizations and published articles concerning investigation into plaintiff's connection to Russian figures because the articles were substantially true.
Publication Date: 2022-01-25
Practice Area: Insurance Law
Industry: Insurance | Pharmaceuticals | Retail
Court: Delaware Supreme Court
Judge: Justice Seitz
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Garrett B. Moritz, R. Garrett Rice, Ross Aronstam & Moritz LLP, Wilmington, DE;Marc S. Casarino, White & Williams LLP, Wilmington, DE; Jonathan D. Hacker, ; O’Melveny & Myers LLP, Washington, D.C.; Michael S. Shuser, Blair E. Kaminsky, Holwell Shuster & Goldberg LLP, New York, NY for, appellants.
for defendant: Jody C. Barillare, Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP, Wilmington, DE; Gerald P. Konkel; Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP, Washington, D.C.; William R. Peterson, Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP, Houston, TX; Christopher M. Popecki, Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP, Los Angeles, CA for appellees.
Case Number: D69688
The court held that the suit against the defendants for which plaintiffs sought defense coverage under its liability policy did not allege damages that were covered by the insurance policy such that the insurer had no duty to defend. Reversed decision of lower court.
Publication Date: 2021-12-21
Practice Area: Mergers and Acquisitions
Industry: Hospitality and Lodging
Court: Delaware Supreme Court
Judge: Justice Seitz
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Raymond J. DiCamillo, Kevin M. Gallagher, Sarah A. Clark, John M. O’Toole, Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Theodore N. Mirvis, William Savitt, Sarah K. Eddy, Ryan A. McLeod, Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz, New York, NY; Theodore B. Olson, Amir C. Tayrani, Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP, Washington, D.C.; Adam H. Offenhartz, Marshall R. King, Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP, New York, NY for appellant.
for defendant: A. Thompson Bayliss, Michael A. Barlow, April M. Kirby, Stephen C. Childs, Abrams & Bayliss LLP, Wilmington, DE; Kathleen M. Sullivan, Michael B. Carlinsky, William B. Adams, Christopher D. Kercher, Rollo C. Baker IV, Todd G. Beattie, Jonathan E. Feder, Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP, New York, NY; Kap-You Kim, Peter & Kim Attorneys at Law, Seoul, South Korea for appellees.
Case Number: D69651
Seller of hotel businesses breached ordinary course covenant by making material changes to operations in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, where the covenant did not contain a material adverse event exception and where seller failed to obtain buyer's consent to the changes.
Publication Date: 2021-11-30
Practice Area: Insurance Law
Industry: Insurance
Court: Delaware Supreme Court
Judge: Justice Seitz
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Kenneth J. Nachbar, Megan Ward Cascio, Sabrina M. Hendershot, Morris, Nichols, Arsht, & Tunnell, LLP, Wilmington, DE, for appellant.
for defendant: Daniel R. Miller, Walden, Macht & Haran, LLP, Philadelphia, PA, for appellee.
Case Number: D69624
The court, in its en banc opinion, answered three certified questions that arose in District Court litigation: first, a death benefit payment made on a void insurance policy still qualified as a payment under a contract within the meaning of 18 Del. C. § 2704(b); second, the use of nonrecourse funding to pay premiums was not a violation of the insurance code without a showing of bad faith; third, fraud in an insurance application did not bar an estate's claim under § 2704(b) when the recipient of the death benefits cannot establish th
Publication Date: 2021-11-16
Practice Area: Patent Licensing and Transactions
Industry: Pharmaceuticals
Court: Delaware Supreme Court
Judge: Justice Seitz
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Joseph B. Warden, Douglas E. McCann, Fish & Richardson P.C., Wilmington, DE for appellants.
for defendant: Daniel A. O’Brien, Venable LLP, Wilmington, DE; Christopher P. Borello, Joshua D. Calabro, Venable LLP, New York, NY for appellee.
Case Number: D69609
The court affirmed the Court of Chancery ruling that the license agreement required appellant to provide a power of attorney to appellee for prosecution of product patents but held, contrary to the Court of Chancery, that the licensor/patent holder had advance approval rights for filings relating to its intellectual property incorporated into the subject product such that appellant was not required to give power of attorney for licensee to file a terminal disclaimer.
Law Journal Press | Digital Book
Authors:
View this BookView more book results for the query "*"
Publication Date: 2021-09-22
Practice Area: Criminal Law
Industry:
Court: Delaware Supreme Court
Judge: Justice Seitz
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Elizabeth R. McFarlan, Delaware Dep’t of Justice, Wilmington, DE for the state.
for defendant: Benjamin S. Gifford IV, Law Office of Benjamin S. Gifford IV, Wilmington, DE for defendant.
Case Number: D69549
The trial court erred in refusing to grant defendant's motion to suppress because a search warrant lacked particularity, and allowing the state to introduce information gleaned from defendant's smartphone into evidence was not harmless error.
Publication Date: 2021-07-21
Practice Area: Corporate Governance
Industry: Investments and Investment Advisory
Court: Delaware Supreme Court
Judge: Justice Seitz
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Max B. Walton, Kyle Evans Gay, Connolly Gallagher LLP, Wilmington, DE; Michael K. Ross, Thomas Shakow, Serine Consolino, Sean Roberts, Aegis Law Group LLP, Washington, DC for plaintiff.
for defendant: Stephen B. Brauerman, Elizabeth A. Powers, Bayard, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Deborah B. Baum, Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP, Washington, DC for defendants.
Case Number: D69471
Chancery court erred in ruling that stock sale to break shareholder deadlock and avoid shareholder's action for appointment of a custodian for the company was permissible if the stock was sold at a fair price, as the company and its board and other shareholder were obligated to demonstrate a compelling justification for conducting the sale.
Publication Date: 2021-06-16
Practice Area: Administrative Law
Industry: State and Local Government | Technology Media and Telecom
Court: Delaware Supreme Court
Judge: Justice Seitz
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Melanie K. Sharp, Martin S. Lessner, Mary F. Dugan, Michael A. Laukaitis II, Young Conaway Stargatt & Taylor, LLP, Wilmington, DE for plaintiff.
for defendant: Brian M. Rostocki, Benjamin P. Chapple, Reed Smith LLP, Wilmington, DE; Sara A. Lima, Reed Smith LLP, Philadelphia, PA for defendant.
Case Number: D69437
Where defendant made a particularized showing regarding an improper purpose in connection with an agency's issuance of a governmental subpoena, the court was entitled to request further submissions before deciding the matter.
Publication Date: 2021-06-02
Practice Area: Contractual Disputes
Industry: Financial Services and Banking | Manufacturing
Court: Delaware Supreme Court
Judge: Justice Seitz
Attorneys: For plaintiff: David L. Finger, Finger & Slanina, LLC, Wilmington, DE for plaintiff.
for defendant: John L. Reed, Peter H, Kyle, DLA Piper LLP (US), Wilmington, DE; Brian A. Foster, Julie Gryce, DLA Piper LLP (US), San Diego, CA for defendants.
Case Number: D69418
The Delaware Supreme Court concluded that the lower court did not abuse its discretion in staying this ac-tion to permit plaintiff to file an action in a more convenient forum.
Publication Date: 2021-04-14
Practice Area: Criminal Law
Industry:
Court: Delaware Supreme Court
Judge: Justice Seitz
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Sean P. Lugg, Delaware Dep’t of Justice, Wilmington, DE for the state.
for defendant: Megan J. Davies, Jan A.T. van Amerongen, Jr., Office of Conflicts Counsel, Wilmington, DE for defendant.
Case Number: D69364
The trial court did not err in denying defendant's motion to sever his case for trial in this criminal racket-eering matter.
Legal Speak is a weekly podcast that makes sense of what’s happening in the legal industry.
1 minute read