Don’t forget you can visit MyAlerts to manage your alerts at any time.
13 results for '* topic:"Litigation"' You can use Search Constraints to get even better search results
Publication Date: 2023-10-30
Practice Area: Litigation
Industry: Federal Government | Technology Media and Telecom
Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
Judge: District Judge Noreika
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Ronald G. Poliquin, The Poliquin Firm LLC, Dover, DE; Brian R. Della Rocca, Compass Law Partners, Rockville, MD for plaintiff.
for defendant: David J. Soldo, Morris James LLP, Wilmington, DE; Alison Schary, Davis Wright Tremaine LLP, Washington, DC; Hilary Oran, Katherine M. Bolger, Davis Wright Tremaine LLP, New York, NY; Brian M. Boynton, Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Civil Division, James G. Touhey, Jr., Director, Torts Branch, Stephen R. Terrell, Attorney, Torts Branch, United States Department Of Justice, Washington, DC; David J. Margules, Ballard Spahr LLP, Wilmington, DE, Lauren Russell, Ballard Spahr LLP, Washington, DC, Kaitlin M. Gurney, Ballard Spahr LLP, Philadelphia, PA; Bartholomew J. Dalton, Dalton & Associates, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Abbe David Lowell, Sanaya M. Tamboli, Winston & Strawn LLP, Washington, DC; David A. Kolansky, Winston & Strawn LLP, New York, NY for defendants.
Case Number: 23-247 (MN)
Applying the four factors enumerated in Pioneer, the court determined that plaintiff's counsel's late filing of an opposition to a motion to dismiss due to his mis-reliance on the rules was not "excusable neglect" and denied his motion to reconsider the court's decision granting the motion to dismiss.
Publication Date: 2023-02-21
Practice Area: Litigation
Industry: Technology Media and Telecom
Court: Delaware Superior Court
Judge: Judge Davis
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: N21C-03-257 EMD
The court applied N.Y. C.P.L.R. §76-a to a defamation dispute regarding New York's anti-SLAPP statute, relying on precedent holding that where the procedural rules of the "foreign state" are so "inseparably interwoven" with the substantive rights as to render a modification of the foregoing rule necessary, the foreign state's laws may apply.
Publication Date: 2022-04-12
Practice Area: Litigation
Industry: Consulting
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Vice Chancellor Will
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Bartholomew J. Dalton, Michael C. Dalton, Dalton & Associates, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Adam Balick, Michael Collins Smith, Balick & Balick, LLC, Wilmington, DE for plaintiff.
for defendant: David E. Ross, Anthony Calvano, Ross Aronstam & Moritz LLP, Wilmington, DE; J. Christian Word, Latham & Watkins LLP, Washington, DC; Luke Nikas, Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP, New York, NY; William A. Burck, Ben A. O’Neil, Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP for defendant.
Case Number: D69776
The court held that plaintiff was not entitled to an anti-suit injunction because a state court cannot restrain federal court proceedings.
Publication Date: 2022-01-04
Practice Area: Litigation
Industry: Pharmaceuticals
Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
Judge: District Judge Andrews
Attorneys: For plaintiff: David M. Klauder, Ryan M. Ernst, Bielli & Klauder, LLC, Wilmington, DE; Thomas D. Bielli, Philadelphia, PA for plaintiff.
for defendant: Brett D. Fallon, Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP, Wilmington, DE; Jeremy M. Sternberg, Holland & Knight LLP, Boston, MA; Stosh Silivos, Holland & Knight LLP, New York, NY for defendant.
Case Number: D69662
The court held that defendant was entitled to a grant of summary judgment being that the action was barred by res judicata.
Publication Date: 2020-10-21
Practice Area: Litigation
Industry: Construction | Legal Services | State and Local Government
Court: Delaware Superior Court
Judge: Judge Streett
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Paul A. Logan for plaintiff.
for defendant: Max B. Walton for defendant.
Case Number: D69160
Reargument on motion to dismiss declaratory judgment suit denied where plaintiff asserted no new facts or law to change the court's determination that the parties' settlement agreement did not obligate defendant to cooperate in plaintiff's separate action against defendant's counsel.
Law Journal Press | Digital Book
Authors:
View this BookView more book results for the query "*"
Publication Date: 2019-10-30
Practice Area: Litigation
Industry: Consulting
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Vice Chancellor Bouchard
Attorneys: For plaintiff: David L. Finger, Finger & Slanina, LLC, Wilmington, DE; David B. Goldstein, Rabinowitz, Boudin, Standard, Krinsky & Lieberman, P.C., New York, NY; Alan M. Dershowitz, Cambridge, MA for Philip Shawe.
for defendant: Frank E. Noyes, II and Charles A. McCauley, III, Offit Kurman, P.A., Wilmington, DE for TransPerfect Global, Inc. Jennifer C. Voss and Elisa M.C. Klein, Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP, Wilmington, DE for custodian. Jeremy D. Eicher, Ei-cher Law LLC, Wilmington, DE for Shirley Shawe. Kevin R. Shannon, Berton W. Ashman, Jr., Christopher N. Kelly, Jaclyn C. Levy and Matthew A. Golden, Potter Anderson & Corroon LLP, Wilmington, DE; Philip S. Kaufman and Jared I Heller, Kramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel LLP, New York, NY for Elizabeth Elting.
Case Number: D68755
Parties were in contempt because they filed a separate suit which deprived the chancery court of exclusive jurisdiction.
Publication Date: 2019-03-27
Practice Area: Contracts | Litigation
Industry: Consulting | Software
Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
Judge: District Judge Andrews
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Theodore A. Kittila and James G. McMillan, III, Halloran Farkas + Kittila LLP, Wilmington, DE for plaintiff.
for defendant: Christopher P. Simon and David G. Holmes, Cross & Simon, LLC, Wilmington, DE for defendants.
Case Number: D68504
Plaintiff owed duty to preserve emails of former employees from the point defendant threatened legal action, but defendant failed to show plaintiff acted in bad faith or to deny evidence to defendant in support of an order of sanctions.
Publication Date: 2017-09-06
Practice Area: Banking and Finance Laws | Litigation
Industry: Financial Services and Banking
Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
Judge:
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: D67854
Rule 60(b) motion brought within the one-year period dismissed where the court found movant failed to bring his motion in a reasonably timely manner by waiting 11 months when the bases for the moti
Publication Date: 2017-09-06
Practice Area: Banking and Finance Laws | Litigation
Industry: Financial Services and Banking
Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
Judge:
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: D67854
Rule 60(b) motion brought within the one-year period dismissed where the court found movant failed to bring his motion in a reasonably timely manner by waiting 11 months when the bases for the moti
Publication Date: 2017-06-21
Practice Area: Litigation
Industry: Biotechnology
Court: Delaware Court of Chancery
Judge:
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: D67772
The Court of Chancery lacked subject matter jurisdiction where the case provided no grounds for equitable jurisdiction in this proceeding involving allegations of defamation. Motion to dismiss gr
Legal Speak is a weekly podcast that makes sense of what’s happening in the legal industry.
1 minute read