NEXT
Sign in to follow
Search Results

0 results for 'Prickett, Jones & Elliott, P.A.'

You can use to get even better search results
Equity-League Pension Trust Fund v. Great Hill Partners L.P.
Publication Date: 2021-12-14
Practice Area: Corporate Governance
Industry: E-Commerce | Investments and Investment Advisory
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Vice Chancellor Glasscock
Attorneys:
For plaintiff: Corinne Elise Amato, Kevin H. Davenport, Jason W. Rigby, Prickett, Jones & Elliott, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Eric L. Zagar, Matthew C. Benedict, Kessler Topaz Meltzer & Check, LLP, Radnor, PA; Patrick C. Lynch, Lynch & Pine, Providence, RI, for plaintiff.
For defendant: Paul J. Lockwood, Jenness E. Parker, Jacob J. Fedechko, Trevor T. Nielsen, Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom, Wilmington, DE; John L. Reed, Ronald N. Brown, III, Peter H. Kyle, Kelly L. Fruend, DLA Piper LLP (US), Wilmington, DE; Rudolf Koch, Matthew D. Perri, Andrew L. Milam, Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Roberto M. Braceras, Caroline H. Bullerjahn, John A. Barker, Dylan E. Schweers, Goodwin Procter LLP, Boston, MA; Kurt M. Heyman, Gillian L. Andrews, Heyman Enerio Gattuso & Hir-zel, LLP, Wilmington, DE; Brandon F. White, Euripides Dalmanieras, Leah S. Rizkallah, Foley Hoag LLP, Boston, MA for defendants.
Case number: D69638

The court held in this derivative suit that demand was not excused where there was no showing that at least five members of a nine-member board of directors were unable to consider a pre-suit demand. Motions to dismiss granted.

December 08, 2021 | Delaware Business Court Insider

Shareholders Say Upholding Chancery Decision Would Destroy Appraisal Rights in DGCL

The shareholders' appeal states it's asking the court to apply Delaware's appraisal statute to determine for the first time whether, for appraisal purposes, a dividend paid after a merger closed can be considered part of the merger, as well as that dividend's effect on appraisal rights.
3 minute read
December 08, 2021 | Delaware Law Weekly

Upholding Chancery Decision Would Destroy Appraisal Rights in DGCL, Shareholders Say

The shareholders' appeal states it's asking the court to apply Delaware's appraisal statute to determine for the first time whether, for appraisal purposes, a dividend paid after a merger closed can be considered part of the merger, as well as that dividend's effect on appraisal rights.
3 minute read
November 24, 2021 | Delaware Business Court Insider

Chancery Court Dismisses Wayfair Shareholder Suit Over Plaintiff's Failure to Make Pre-Suit Demand

Vice Chancellor Sam Glasscock III found that the plaintiff did not demonstrate that the defendants acted in bad faith when they approved a debt issuance transaction, giving the defendants cause to dismiss the suit.
3 minute read
Hollywood Firefighters' Pension Fund v. Malone
Publication Date: 2021-11-23
Practice Area: Attorney Compensation
Industry: Investments and Investment Advisory | Legal Services | Technology Media and Telecom
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Vice Chancellor Glasscock
Attorneys:
For plaintiff: Gregory V. Varallo, Andrew E. Blumberg, Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann LLP, Wilmington, DE; Michael Hanrahan, Kevin H. Davenport, Mary S. Thomas, Prickett, Jones & Elliott, P.A.; Mark Lebovitch, Jacqueline Y. Ma, Daniel E. Meyer, Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann LLP, New York, NY; Lee D. Rudy, Eric L. Zagar, Christopher M. Windover, Matthew C. Benedict, Kessler Topaz Meltzer & Check, LLP, Randor, PA; Robert D.Klausner, Klausner Kaufman Jensen & Levinson, P.A., Plantation, FL; Aaron T. Morris, Morris Kandinov LLP, Stowe, VT for plaintiffs.
For defendant: Robert S. Saunders, Joseph O. Larkin, Matthew P. Majarian, Ryan M. Lindsay, Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP, Wilmington, DE; Richard B. Harper, Thomas E. O’Brien, Vern Cassin, Baker Botts LLP, New York, NY; Kenneth J. Nachbar, Megan W. Cascio, Thomas P. Will, Sarah P. Kaboly, Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP, Wilmington, DE; Douglas D. Herrmann, Emily L. Wheatley, Troutman Pepper Hamilton Sanders LLP, Wilmington, DE for defendants.
Case number: D69614

The court held that plaintiffs were entitled to a mootness fee in the amount of 9 million dollars.

Law Journal Press | Digital Book Anatomy of a Merger: Strategies and Techniques for Negotiating Corporate Acquisitions Authors: James C. Freund View this Book

View more book results for the query "Prickett, Jones & Elliott, P.A."

November 08, 2021 | New York Law Journal

Boeing Shareholders Float $237.5M Settlement in NY State Comptroller-Led Suit

The agreement would conclude litigation by shareholders who argue Boeing should have had more oversight over the 737 MAX aircrafts that resulted in two mass-casualty crashes.
5 minute read
November 03, 2021 | Delaware Business Court Insider

Slights: Lead Counsel in Facebook Case Won't Change, Despite Firms Separately Representing Direct Claims

Vice Chancellor Joseph R. Slights III determined Tuesday that criticism of the shareholders' team appeared to have been brought up as leverage in the leadership bid, not as a concern significant enough to warrant an interlocutory appeal.
3 minute read
November 03, 2021 | Delaware Law Weekly

'Remote, Hypothetical Conflicts' Don't Merit Shakeup of Lead Counsel in Facebook Case: Slights

Vice Chancellor Joseph R. Slights III determined Tuesday that criticism of the shareholders' team appeared to have been brought up as leverage in the leadership bid, not as a concern significant enough to warrant an interlocutory appeal.
3 minute read
Totta v. CCSB Fin. Corp.
Publication Date: 2021-11-02
Practice Area: Corporate Governance
Industry: Financial Services and Banking
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Chancellor McCormick
Attorneys:
For plaintiff: Kevin H. Davenport, John G. Day, Prickett, Jones & Elliott, P.A., Wilmington, DE for plaintiffs.
For defendant: Art. C. Aranilla, Marshall Dennehey Warner Coleman & Goggin, Wilmington, DE; Brett A. Scher, Patrick M. Kennell, Kaufman Dolowich & Voluck, LLP, New York, NY for defendant.
Case number: D69591

Motion to dismiss challenge to board election denied where motion referred to documents outside of the pleadings, requiring conversion of the motion to one for summary judgment, under which standard the court determined that further factfinding was required.

Feurer v. Zuckerberg
Publication Date: 2021-10-20
Practice Area: Corporate Governance
Industry: E-Commerce | Technology Media and Telecom
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Vice Chancellor Slights
Attorneys:
For plaintiff: Daniel K. Astin, Ciardi Ciardi & Astin, Wilmington, DE; Richard D. Greenfield, Marguerite R. Goodman, Ann M. Caldwell, Greenfield & Goodman LLC, Philadelphia, PA; Albert A. Ciardi III, Walter W. Gouldsbury III, Ciardi, Ciardi & Astin, Philadelphia, PA; Kevin H. Davenport, Samuel L. Closic, John G. Day, Elizabeth Wang, Prickett, Jones & Elliott, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Peter B. Andrews; Craig J. Springer, David M. Sborz, Andrews & Springer, LLC; Geoffrey M. Johnson, Scott+Scott Attorneys At Law LLP, Cleveland Heights, OH; Donald A. Broggi, William C. Fredericks, Scott R. Jacobsen, Jing-Li Yu, Scott+Scott Attorneys At Law LLP, New York, NY; Daniel B. Rehns, Frank R. Schirripa, Kurt M. Hunciker, Kathryn Hettler, Hach Rose Schirripa & Cheverie LLP, New York, NY; Brian J. Robbins, Stephen J. Oddo, Gregory E. Del Gaizo, Rob-bins LLP, San Diego, CA; Thomas J. McKenna, Gregory M. Egleston, Gainey McKenna & Egleston, New York, NY; Joseph J. Tabacco, Jr., Daniel E. Barenbaum, Berman Tabacco, San Francisco, CA; Joseph W. Cotchett, Mark Molumphy, Julia Peng, Cotchett Pitre & McCarthy LLP; Thaddeus J. Weaver, Dilworth Paxson LLP, Wilmington, DE; Frederic S. Fox, Laurence D. King, Hae Sung Nam, Donnie Hall, Aaron Schwartz, Kaplan Fox & Kilsheimer LLP, New York, NY; Kathleen A. Herkenhoff, Kaplan Fox & Kilsheimer LLP, Oakland, CA; Catherine Pratsinakis, Dilworth Paxson LLP, Philadelphia, PA; Nathan A. Cook, Mae Oberste, Block & Leviton LLP, Wilmington, DE; Kurt M. Heyman, Melissa N. Donimirski, Aaron M. Nelson, Heyman Enerio Gattuso & Hirzel LLP, Wilmington, DE; Jason M. Leviton, Joel Fleming, Lauren G. Milgroom, Block & Leviton LLP, Boston, MA for plaintiffs.
For defendant: David E. Ross, R. Garrett Rice, Ross Aronstam & Moritz LLP, Wilmington, DE; Orin Snyder, Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP, New York, NY; Brian M. Lutz, Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP, San Francisco, CA; Paul J. Collins, Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP, Palo Alto, CA; Joshua S. Lipshutz, Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP, Washington, DC for defendants.
Case number: D69574

The court held that consolidation of cases was not appropriate where one case's derivative plaintiffs made no demand on the corporate board and the other case's single plaintiff chose to make a demand that was subsequently refused.

More from ALM

More from ALM

Legal Speak is a weekly podcast that makes sense of what’s happening in the legal industry.

Resources