• Ace Am. Ins. Co. v. Rite Aid Corp.

    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.

  • AB Stable VIII LLC v. MAPS Hotels & Resorts One LLC

    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.

  • Lavastone Capital LLC v. Estate of Berland

    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

  • OptiNose AS v. Currax Pharm. LLC

    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.

  • Taylor v. State of Delaware

    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.

  • Law Journal Press | Digital Book

    Florida Construction Defect Litigation 2025

    Authors: Gary L. Brown

    View this Book

    View more book results for the query "*"

  • Coster v. UIP Co., Inc.

    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.

  • State of Delaware, Dep't of Fin. v. AT&T Inc.

    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.

  • GXP Capital, LLC v. Argonaut Mfg. Serv., Inc.

    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.

  • Lloyd v. State of Delaware

    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.

  • Morris v. Spectra Energy Partners (DE) GP, LP

    Publication Date: 2021-02-10
    Practice Area: Mergers and Acquisitions
    Industry: Energy | Investments and Investment Advisory
    Court: Delaware Supreme Court
    Judge: Justice Seitz
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Michael J. Barry, Rebecca A. Musarra, Grant & Eisenhoffer P.A., Wilmington, DE; Peter B. Andrews, Craig J. Springer, David M. Sborz, Andrews & Springer LLC, Wilmington, DE; Jeremy S. Friedman, Spencer Oster, David F.E. Tejtel, Friedman Oster & Tejtel PLLC, Bedford Hills, NY for plaintiff.
    for defendant: Robert S. Saunders, Ronald N. Brown, III, Ryan M. Linsay, Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP, Wilmington, DE; Noelle M. Reed, Daniel S. Mayerfeld, Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP, Hou-ston, TX for defendant.

    Case Number: D69293

    The trial court erred in applying a litigation risk discount on a motion to dismiss for lack of standing.