• Tesla Inc. v. Delaware Div. of Motor Vehicles

    Publication Date: 2023-06-06
    Practice Area: Administrative Law
    Industry: Automotive | Retail | State and Local Government
    Court: Delaware Supreme Court
    Judge: Justice Seitz
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Kelly E. Farnan, Tyler E. Cragg, Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Felicia H. Ellsworth, Sofie C. Brooks, Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP, Boston, MA; Ari Holtzblatt, Leon T. Kenworthy, Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP, Washington, D.C. for appellant.
    for defendant: George T. Lees III, Delaware Department of Transportation, Dover, DE for appellee.

    Case Number: 375, 2022

    DMV erred in interpreting Franchise Act to include a ban on the direct sales model, and vehicle manufacturer with no third-party dealers did not qualify as a "manufacturer" under the Act's definition.

  • Huntley v. VBit Tech. Corp.

    Publication Date: 2023-06-06
    Practice Area: Securities Litigation
    Industry: E-Commerce
    Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
    Judge: District Judge Fallon
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:

    Case Number: 22-1164-CFC-SRF

    Court granted motion for leave to amend securities complaint where no scheduling order had been entered in the case and no defendant had raised a claim that amendment would result in undue prejudice.

  • Novartis Pharm. Corp. v. HEC Pharm Co., Ltd.

    Publication Date: 2023-06-06
    Practice Area: Patent Litigation
    Industry: Pharmaceuticals
    Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
    Judge: District Judge Williams
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Daniel M. Silver, Alexandra M. Joyce, Fish & Richardson P.C.; Jane M. Love, Ph.D., Robert Trenchard, Andrew P. Blythe, Christine L. Ranney, Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP for plaintiff.
    for defendant: Stamatios Stamoulis, Stamoulis & Weinblatt LLC; Mieke K. Malmberg, Paul J. Skiermont, Sarah E. Spires, Steven J. Udick, Kevin P. Potere, Skiermont Derby LLP for defendant.

    Case Number: 20-133-GBW

    Court declined defendants' more limited proposed claim constructions that included negative limitations which had no basis in the intrinsic record.

  • Diamond State Door, LLC v. Diamond State Pole Bldg., LLC

    Publication Date: 2023-06-06
    Practice Area: Trademarks
    Industry: Construction | Retail
    Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
    Judge: District Judge Andrews
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Thomas H. Kramer, Anthony N. Delcollo, Offit Kurman, P.A., Wilmington, DE for plaintiff.
    for defendant: John C. Andrade, Elio Battista, Jr., Kyle F. Dunkle, Parkowski, Guerke & Swayze, P.A., Dover, DE for defendant.

    Case Number: 21 -1258-RGA

    Geographically descriptive mark was not protectable where lack of advertising, limited customer base, and lack of evidence of consumer confusion demonstrated that the mark had not acquired a secondary meaning.

  • In re: Asbestos Litig.

    Publication Date: 2023-06-06
    Practice Area: Products Liability
    Industry: Manufacturing
    Court: Delaware Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Jones
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Michael C. Dalton, Dalton & Associates, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Michael Collins Smith, Balick & Balick, LLC, Wilmington, DE for plaintiff.
    for defendant: Brian D. Tome, Reilly, McDevitt & Henrich, P.C., Wilmington, DE, attorney for defendant.

    Case Number: N19C-01-100 ASB

    Manufacturer of machinery expressly designed to work on asbestos-containing products could have liability in asbestos litigation since use of the product would inevitably create hazardous asbestos dust, imposing a duty to warn upon the manufacturer.

  • Law Journal Press | Digital Book

    New Jersey Law of Personal Injury: With the Model Jury Charges 2024

    Authors: James Hely, Donald A. Digioia

    View this Book

    View more book results for the query "*"

  • Galderma Labs. L.P. v. Lupin Inc.

    Publication Date: 2023-06-06
    Practice Area: Patent Litigation
    Industry: Pharmaceuticals
    Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
    Judge: District Judge Bibas
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Jack B. Blumenfeld, Jeremy A. Tigan, Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP, Wilmington, DE; Andrew J. Cochran, Gerald J. Flattman, Jr., Cahill Gordon & Reindel LLP, New York, NY for plaintiffs.
    for defendant: Megan C. Haney, John C. Phillips, Jr., Phillips, McLaughlin & Hall, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Adrianne C. Rose, Joseph T. Jaros, Natasha L. White, William A. Rakoczy, Rakoczy Molino Mazzochi Siwik LLP, Chicago, IL for defendants.

    Case Number: 21-cv-1710-SB

    Court could clarify claim constructions from prior litigation involving the same patents-in-suit even if patentee acted as its own lexicographer, but only narrow clarification was necessary for one of the disputed terms.

  • Lamplight Licensing LLC v. ABB Inc.

    Publication Date: 2023-06-06
    Practice Area: Patent Litigation
    Industry: Legal Services
    Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
    Judge: District Judge Connolly
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Jimmy C. Chong, Chong Law Firm, PA, Wilmington, DE for plaintiff.
    for defendant: Benjamin J. Schladweiler, Greenberg Traurig, LLP, Wilmington, DE; Andrew R. Sommer, Greenberg Traurig, LLP, McLean, VA for defendant.

    Case Number: 22-418-CFC

    Court possessed inherent authority to investigate plaintiff's possible efforts to defraud the court even after plaintiff voluntarily moved to dismiss its lawsuit.

  • In the Matter of the Estate of Cordray

    Publication Date: 2023-06-06
    Practice Area: Trusts and Estates
    Industry:
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Vice Chancellor Glasscock
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Gerald I. Street, Street & Ellis, P.A., Dover, DE for petitioner.
    for defendant: Deirdre A. McCartney, Sergovic Carmean Weidman Mccartney & Owens, PA, Georgetown, DE for respondent. Cynthia L. Maxwell Masters, respondent pro se. Diane Elaine Maxwell Tori, respondent pro se. Beverly Anne Maxwell Miller, respondent pro se.

    Case Number: 2022-0614-SG

    Slayer Statute did not prohibit heirs through the lineage of the slayer from inheriting from the slayer's issue's estate, since the murder had no effect on the heirs' eligibility to inherit through the intestacy statute.

  • Consolidated, LLC v. GFP Cement Contractors, LLC

    Publication Date: 2023-05-30
    Practice Area: Contracts
    Industry: Construction
    Court: Delaware Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Butler
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Kevin S. Mann, Christopher P. Simon, Cross & Simon, LLC, Wilmington, DE for plaintiff.
    for defendant: Krista M. Reale, Tara D. McManamy, Margolis Edelstein, Wilmington, DE for defendant.

    Case Number: N22C-06-084 CEB

    Subcontractor had express contractual obligation to indemnify general contractor pursuant to the parties' contract after the subcontractor's subcontracted materials supplier damaged the site owner's property and the site owner obtained financial recovery from the general contractor.

  • In re Oracle Corp. Derivative Litig.

    Publication Date: 2023-05-30
    Practice Area: Mergers and Acquisitions
    Industry: Software
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Vice Chancellor Glasscock
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Joel Friedlander, Jeffrey M. Gorris, David Hahn, Friedlander & Gorris, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Randall J. Baron, David A. Knotts, Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP, San Diego, CA; Christopher H. Lyons, Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP, Nashville, TN; Gregory Del Gaizo, Robbins LLP, San Diego, CA for plaintiffs.
    for defendant: Blake Rohrbacher, Susan M. Hannigan, Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Elena C. Norman, Richard J. Thomas, Alberto E. Chávez, Young Conaway Stargatt & Taylor, LLP, Wilmington, DE; Peter A. Wald, Latham & Watkins LLP, San Francisco, CA; Blair Connelly, Latham & Watkins LLP, New York, NY for defendants.

    Case Number: 2017-0337-SG

    Corporate founder who retained a quarter stake of the company and served as a director and officer did not attempt to use his influence to drive acquisition of another company in which he also held an interest, such that the board's appointment of a special committee to negotiate the acquisition meant that the transaction did not need to be reviewed under entire fairness.