• Kilcullen v. Spectro Scientific, Inc.

    Publication Date: 2019-07-31
    Practice Area: Deals and Transactions
    Industry: Automotive | Manufacturing | Software
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Vice Chancellor McCormick
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Kevin G. Abrams, J. Peter Shindel, Jr. and Matthew L. Miller, Abrams & Bayliss LLP, Wilmington, DE; Herbert J. Stern and Brian J. DeBoer, Stern Kilcullen & Rufolo LLC, Florham Park, NJ for plaintiff.
    for defendant: Raymond J. DiCamillo and Kevin M. Gallagher, Richards, Layton & Finder, P.A., Wilmington, DE; John J. Tumilty and Amanda R. Phillips, Morse, Barnes-Brown & Pendleton, P.C., Waltham, MA for defendant.

    Case Number: D68651

    The statute of limitations barred most of a buyer's indemnity claims.

  • Leaf Invenergy Co. v. Invenergy Renewables LLC

    Publication Date: 2019-05-22
    Practice Area: Damages | Deals and Transactions
    Industry: Energy | Investments and Investment Advisory
    Court: Delaware Supreme Court
    Judge: Justice Traynor
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Bradley D. Sorrels, Shannon E. German, Andrew D. Berni, Keith E. Eggleton, Steven D. Guggenheim and David A. McCarthy, Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati, P.C., Wilmington, DE and Palo Alto, CA for plaintiff.
    for defendant: Kenneth J. Nachbar, Kevin M. Coen, Zi-Xiang Shen and Coleen W. Hill, Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP, Wilmington, DE; Bruce S. Sperling, Harvey J. Barnett and Eamon P. Kelly, Sperling & Slater, P.C., Chicago, IL for defendant.

    Case Number: D68469

    The parties' agreement unambiguously required consent or the redemption of shares in the event of a sale, and because de-fendant chose to do neither, plaintiff was entitled to damages.

  • Olenik v. Lodzinski

    Publication Date: 2019-04-17
    Practice Area: Deals and Transactions
    Industry: Energy | Investments and Investment Advisory
    Court: Delaware Supreme Court
    Judge: Justice Seitz
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Jeremy S. Friedman, Spencer Oster and David F.E. Tejtel, Friedman Oster & Tejtel, PLLC, New York, NY; Ned Weinburger and Thomas Curry, Labaton Sucharow LLP, Wilmington, DE; Peter B. Andrews, Craig J. Springer and David Sborz, Andrews & Springer LLC, Wilmington, DE for plaintiff.
    for defendant: Kenneth J. Nachbar, D. McKinley Measley and Lauren Neal Bennett, Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP, Wilmington, DE; Gerard G. Pecht, Peter A. Stokes and William Patrick Courtney, Norton Rose Fullbright US LLP, Houston, TX and Austin, TX for defendants Lodzinski, Singleton, Bold Energy III LLC and Earthstone Energy, Inc. Rolin P. Bissell and James M. Yoch, Jr., Young Conaway Stargatt & Taylor, LLP, Wilmington, DE; Michael C. Holmes, Craig E. Zieminski, Stephen S. Gilstrap, R. Kent Piacenti and Jeffrey Crough, Vinson & Elkins LLP, Dallas, TX for defendants Swanson, Thielmann, Zorich, EnCap Investments, Bold Energy Holdings, LLC and Oak Valley Resources, LLC.

    Case Number: D68531

    Plaintiff alleged sufficient facts to avoid dismissal of this derivative action, because substantive economic negotiations occurred prior to the formation of a special committee.

  • In re Centaur, LLC

    Publication Date: 2019-01-16
    Practice Area: Bankruptcy | Deals and Transactions
    Industry: Consulting | Entertainment and Leisure
    Court: U.S. Bankruptcy Court
    Judge: Judge Carey
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:

    Case Number: D68426

    Litigation trustee was entitled to summary judgment in this fraudulent transfer matter, because the debtor was insolvent at the time of the transaction and no exchange or reasonably equivalent value occurred.

  • Zayo Group, LLC v. Latisys Holdings, LLC

    Publication Date: 2018-12-19
    Practice Area: Contractual Disputes | Deals and Transactions
    Industry: Technology Media and Telecom
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Vice Chancellor Slights
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Elizabeth S. Fenton and Scott W. Perkins, Saul Ewing Arnstein & Lehr LLP, Wilmington, DE for plaintiff.
    for defendant: Philip Trainer, Jr. and Marie M. Degnan, Ashby & Geddes, Wilmington, DE; Mark D. Cahill, Phoebe Fischer-Groban and Christina G.T. Lau, Choate Hall & Steward LLP, Boston, MA for defendant.

    Case Number: D68397

    Plaintiff did not establish that defendant breached the parties' sale agreement by failing to disclose non-renewals by some of its major customers, because the agreement did not require such notice.

  • Law Journal Press | Digital Book

    Chester County Court Rules 2024

    Authors:

    View this Book

    View more book results for the query "*"

  • Busch v. Richardson

    Publication Date: 2018-11-28
    Practice Area: Corporate Entities | Deals and Transactions | Securities Litigation
    Industry: Manufacturing
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Chancellor Bouchard
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Peter B. Andrews, Craig J. Springer, and David M. Sborz, Andrews & Springer LLC, Wilmington, DE; Jeffrey Norton and Roger A. Sachar, Newman Ferrara LLP, New York, NY; Peter Safirstein and Elizabeth S. Metcalf, Safirstein Metcalf LLP, New York, NY for plaintiff
    for defendant: Blake Rohrbacher, Kevin M. Gallagher, and John M. O'Toole, Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A., Wilmington, DE; P. Clarkson Collins, Jr., Morris James LLP, Wilmington, DE; Garrett B. Moritz and Roger S. Stronach, Ross Aronstam & Moritz LLP, Wilmington, DE for defendants.

    Case Number: D68366

    Derivative complaint arising from related-party transactions dismissed after board exercised business judgment to decline stockholder's litigation demand, where stockholder failed to plead that demand was made in reliance on company's inaccurate representations or that a majority of the directors were not disinterested or independent.

  • Scott v. Vantage Corp.

    Publication Date: 2018-11-28
    Practice Area: Deals and Transactions | Private Equity and Venture Capital
    Industry: Investments and Investment Advisory | Software
    Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
    Judge: District Judge Thynge
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:

    Case Number: D68373

    Defendants adequately alleged contract and breach of warranty counterclaims, but their tort counterclaims were not based on the violation of any independent legal duty.

  • Post Holdings, Inc. v. NPE Seller Rep LLC

    Publication Date: 2018-11-14
    Practice Area: Corporate Entities | Deals and Transactions
    Industry: Food and Beverage
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Chancellor Bouchard
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Rodger D. Smith II, Ryan D. Stottmann and Alexandra M. Cumings of Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP, Wilmington, DE; Richard B. Walsh, Jr. and Evan Z. Reid of Lewis Rice LLC, St. Louis, MO for plaintiffs.
    for defendant: Kevin R. Shannon, Christopher N. Kelly and Jay G. Stirling of Potter, Anderson & Corroon LLP, Wil-mington, DE; William C. O'Neil, Jeffrey J. Huelskamp and Michael A. Meneghini of Winston & Strawn LLP, Chicago, IL for defendants.

    Case Number: D68356

    Plaintiffs could not enjoy benefits under the contract while refusing to perform their obligations under it.

  • Talley-Siders v. Mayhorn

    Publication Date: 2018-10-31
    Practice Area: Deals and Transactions | Real Estate
    Industry: Real Estate
    Court: Delaware Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Scott
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Donald L. Gouge, Jr. for plaintiffs.
    for defendant: N/A

    Case Number: D68340

    The trial court's decision in favor of sellers was supported by substantial evidence, and buyer failed to establish the elements of fraud.

  • Village Green Holding, LLC v. Holtzman

    Publication Date: 2018-10-17
    Practice Area: Corporate Entities | Deals and Transactions
    Industry: Real Estate
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Vice Chancellor Montgomery-Reeves
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Richard P. Rollo, Anthony M. Calvano, Courtney A. Carvill, Alan S. Loewinsohn and Kerry Schonwald, attorneys for plaintiffs
    for defendant: Brian E. Farnan , Michael J. Farnan and Marc L. Newman, attorneys for defendants.

    Case Number: D68319

    Plaintiffs were entitled to preliminary injunction precluding defendants from further litigating action in another jurisdiction where parties had valid forum selection clauses conferring exclusive jurisdiction on Delaware.