Filter This View

  • In re WeWork Litig.

    Publication Date: 2020-11-18
    Practice Area: Deals and Transactions
    Industry: Financial Services and Banking | Investments and Investment Advisory | Real Estate
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Chancellor Bouchard
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: William M. Lafferty, Kevin M. Coen, Sabrina M. Hendershot, Sara Toscano, Morris Nichols Arsht & Tunnell LLP, Wilmington, DE; Eric Seiler, Philippe Adler, Mala Ahuja Harker, Friedman Kaplan Seiler & Adelman LLP, New York, NY; William Christopher Carmody, Shawn J. Rabin, Arun Subramanian, Susman Godfrey L.L.P., New York, NY for plaintiffs.
    for defendant: William B. Chandler, III, Brad D. Sorrels, Lori W. Will, Lindsay Kwoka Faccenda, Leah E. Brenner, Jeremy W. Gagas, Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati, P.C., Wilmington, DE; David J. Berger, Steven M. Gugen-heim, Dylan G. Savage, Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati, P.C., Palo Alto, CA; Michael S. Sommer, Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati, P.C., New York, NY for the special committee of the board of directors of The We Co. Robert S. Saunders, Sarah R. Martin, Arthur R. Bookout, Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP, Wilmington, DE; George A. Zimmerman, Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP, New York, NY for The We Co. Elena C. Norman, Rolin P. Bissell, Nicholas J. Rohrer, Young Conaway Stargatt & Taylor, LLP, Wilmington, DE; Erik J. Olson, Morrison & Foerster LLP, Palo Alto, CA; James Bennett, Jordan Eth, Morri-son & Foerster LLP, San Francisco, CA for defendant SoftBank Group Corp. Michael A. Barlow, E. Wade Houston, Abrams & Bayliss LLP, Wilmington, DE; John B. Quinn, Molly Stephens, Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP, Los Angeles, CA for defendant SoftBank Vision Fund.
    Case Number: D69193

    Plaintiff stated a claim against defendants for breach of contract, but his breach of fiduciary duty claim was duplicative of the contract claim.

  • In re Altaba, Inc.

    Publication Date: 2020-11-04
    Practice Area: Corporate Entities
    Industry: Technology Media and Telecom
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Vice Chancellor Laster
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Paul J. Lockwood, Arthur R. Bookout, Matthew P. Majarian, Gregory P. Ranzini, Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom Llp, Wilmington, DE for petitioner.
    for defendant: Albert H. Manwaring, IV, Kirsten A. Zeberkiewicz, Morris James LLP, Wilmington, DE; Thad J. Bracegirdle, Bayard, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Christopher P. Simon, Kevin S. Mann, David G. Holmes, Cross & Simon, LLC, Wilmington, DE; E.F. Anthony Merchant, Q.C., Merchant Law Group LLP, Regina, Saskatchewan; Evan W. Rassman, Reger Rizzo & Darnall LLP, Wilmington, DE; Michael F. Long, Watkins & Letofsky, LLP, Santa Ana, CA; Michael A. Pittenger, Berton W. Ashman, Jr., David A. Seal, Potter Anderson & Corroon, LLP, Wilmington, DE; William Savitt, Adam M. Gogolak, Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz, New York, NY for claimants.
    Case Number: D69175

    Company seeking to make interim stockholder distribution directed to holdback full reserve requested by claimants due to pending nature of class action in foreign country, making it impractical for the court to anticipate the outcome of the action.

  • In re WeWork Litig.

    Publication Date: 2020-09-02
    Practice Area: Corporate Governance
    Industry: Investments and Investment Advisory | Real Estate
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Chancellor Bouchard
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: William B. Chandler III, Brad D. Sorrels, Lori W. Will, Lindsay Kwoka Faccenda, Leah E. Brenner, and Jeremy W. Gagas, Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati, P.C., Wilmington, DE; Michael S. Sommer, Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati, P.C., New York, NY; David J. Berger, Steven M. Guggenheim, and Dylan G. Savage, Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati, P.C., Palo Alto, CA; William M. Lafferty, Kevin M. Coen, Sabrina M. Hendershot, and Sara Toscano, Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP, Wilmington, DE; Eric Seiler, Philippe Adler, and Mala Ahuja Harker, Friedman Kaplan Seiler & Adelman LLP, New York, NY; William Christopher Carmody, Shawn J. Rabin, and Arun Subramanian, Susman Godfrey L.L.P., New York, NY for plaintiffs.
    for defendant: Robert S. Saunders and Sarah R. Martin, Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP, Wilmington, DE; George A. Zimmerman, Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP, New York, NY; Elena C. Norman, Rolin P. Bissell, and Nicholas J. Rohrer, Young Conaway Stargatt & Taylor, LLP, Wilmington, DE; Erik J. Olson, Morrison & Foerster LLP, Palo Alto, CA; James Bennett and Jordan Eth, Morrison & Foerster LLP, San Francisco, CA; Michael A. Barlow and E. Wade Houston, Abrams & Bayliss LLP, Wilmington, DE; John B. Quinn and Molly Stephens, Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP, Los Angeles, CA for defendants.
    Case Number: D69102

    Corporation could not bar specific directors from privileged information provided to the corporation as the director's management authority rendered it a joint client of the corporation and its board.

  • In re Coty Inc. Stockholder Litig.

    Publication Date: 2020-09-02
    Practice Area: Corporate Governance
    Industry: Consumer Products
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Chancellor Bouchard
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Ned Weinberger, Labaton Sucharow LLP, Wilmington, DE; John Vielandi and David MacIsaac, Labaton Sucharow LLP, New York, NY; Joel Friedlander, Jeffrey M. Gorris and Christopher P. Quinn, Friedlander & Gorris, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Jeremy S. Friedman and David F.E. Tejtel, Friedman Oster & Tejtel PLLC, Bedford Hills, NY; D. Seamus Kaskela, Kaskela Law LLC, Newtown Square, PA for plaintiffs.
    for defendant: Kevin R. Shannon, J. Matthew Belger and Nicholas D. Mozal of Potter Anderson & Corroon LLP, Wil-mington, DE; Gregory P. Williams, Raymond J. DiCamillo, Angela Lam and Kevin M. Regan, Richards Layton & Finger, P.A, Wilmington, DE; James W. Ducayet, Nilofer Umar, Benjamin Friedman and Zarine Alam, Sidley Austin LLP, Chicago, IL; Paul J. Lockwood, Alyssa S. O’Connell and Bonnie W. David, Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP, Wilmington, DE; Lauren E. Aguiar, Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP, New York, NY; Patricia L. Enerio and Aaron M. Nelson, Heyman Enerio Gattuso & Hirzel LLP, Wilmington, DE for defendants and nominal defendant.
    Case Number: D69105

    Stockholder alleged sufficient facts to support their claims for breach of contract and breach of fiduciary duty, so the court denied defendants' motion to dismiss.

  • The Chemours Co. v. DowDuPont Inc.

    Publication Date: 2020-04-15
    Practice Area: Corporate Entities
    Industry: Chemicals and Materials | Manufacturing
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Vice Chancellor Glasscock
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Joel Friedlander, Jeffrey Gorris, Christopher Foulds, and Christopher P. Quinn, Friedlander & Gorris P.A., Wilmington, DE; William Savitt, Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz, New York, NY for plaintiff.
    for defendant: Robert S. Saunders, Jennifer C. Voss, Arthur R. Bookout, and Jessica R. Kunz, Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP, Wilmington, DE for defendants.
    Case Number: D68944

    Complaint dismissed where parties had agreed to arbitration clause that included broad delegation provision, which was not void or unconscionable simply because parent corporation had dictated terms to subsidiary.

  • In re: AmTrust Fin. Serv., Inc. Stockholder Litig.

    Publication Date: 2020-03-11
    Practice Area: Mergers and Acquisitions
    Industry: Insurance | Investments and Investment Advisory
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Chancellor Bouchard
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Ned Weinberger, Thomas Curry and Mark D. Richardson, Labaton Sucharow LLP, Wilmington, DE; Jay W. Eisenhofer, Mi-chael J. Barry and Kyle J. McGee, Grand & Eisenhofer P.A., Wilmington, DE; Marcus E. Montejo, Stephen D. Dargitz and John G. Day, Prickett, Jones & Elliott, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Carl L. Stine, Adam J. Blander and Antoinette Adesanya, Wolf Popper LLP, New York, NY; Jeremy Friedman, Spencer Oster and David Tejtel, Friedman Oster & Tejtel, PLLC, New York, NY; Eric L. Zagar, Robin Winchester, Michael C. Wagner and Christopher M. Windover, Kessler Topaz Meltzer & Check, LLP, Radnor, PA; David Wales and Edward Timlin, Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann LLP, New York, NY; Joseph E. White, III, Adam D. Warden, Steven B. Singer and Joshua Saltzman, Saxena White P.A., Boca Raton, FL and White Plains, NY for plaintiffs.
    for defendant: Edward B. Micheletti and Bonnie W. David, Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flow LLP, Wilmington, DE for Stone Point, Trident and Parallel Fund defendants. Gregory P. Williams, Blake Rohrbacher, Daniel E. Kaprow and Ryan D. Konstanzer, Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Tariq Mundiya and Sameer Advani, Willkie Farr & Gallagher LLP, New York, NY for defendants DeCarlo, Fisch, Gulkowitz and Rivera. Daniel A. Mason, Andrew G. Gordon and William A. Clareman, Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP, Wilmington, DE and New York, NY for Zyskind, Karfunkel and Ev-ergreen defendants.
    Case Number: D68906

    Plaintiffs alleged sufficient facts to support a reasonable inference that certain defendants participated in a breach of fiduciary duty, so the entire fairness standard applied. The court dismissed the remainder of plaintiffs' claims.

  • Dahle v. Pope

    Publication Date: 2020-02-19
    Practice Area: Corporate Governance
    Industry: Technology Media and Telecom
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Vice Chancellor Glasscock
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Blake A. Bennett, Cooch and Taylor, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Jeffrey M. Norton, Newman Ferrara LLP, New York, NY; Werner R. Kranenburg, Krankenburg, London, UK for plaintiffs.
    for defendant: Edward B. Micheletti, Lilianna Anh P. Townsend, and Mary T. Reale, Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP, Wilmington, Delaware for defendants.
    Case Number: D68879

    Plaintiffs' pre-suit communication to board constituted a Rule 23.1 demand where it asserted the need to take remedial action on a board decision, noted the company's susceptibility to shareholder action, and warned that plaintiffs would take advantage of shareholder remedies if no action were taken by the board.

  • In re: Appraisal of Panera Bread Co.

    Publication Date: 2020-02-19
    Practice Area: Mergers and Acquisitions
    Industry: Food and Beverage
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Vice Chancellor Zurn
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Samuel T. Hirzel, II, Elizabeth A. DeFelice and Melissa N. Donimirski, Heyman Ererio Gattuso & Hirzel LLP, Wilmington, DE; Steven M. Hecht, Michael T.G. Long, Jarett N. Sena, Natalie F. Dallavalle, Frank T.M. Catalina, Edoardo Murillo and Jonathan M. Kass, Lowenstein Sandler LLP, New York, NY for peti-tioners.
    for defendant: Paul J. Lockwood, Jennifer C. Voss, Jenness E. Parker, Alyssa S. O’Connell, Kaitlin E. Maloney, Daniel S. Atlas, Bonnie W. David and Andrew D. Kinsey, Skadden Arps Slate Meagher & Flom LLP, Wilming-ton, DE for respondent.
    Case Number: D68882

    In this statutory appraisal action, the court determined that the process by which the company was sold bore multiple indicia of reliability, and the deal price was persuasive evidence of fair value.

  • In re Essendant, Inc. Stockholder Litig.

    Publication Date: 2020-01-15
    Practice Area: Mergers and Acquisitions
    Industry: Distribution and Wholesale
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Vice Chancellor Slights
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Blake A. Bennett, Cooch and Taylor, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Juan E. Monteverde and Miles D. Schreiner, Monteverde & Associates PC, New York, NY; Donald J. Enright and Elizabeth K. Tripodi, Levi & Korsinsky, LLP, Washington, DC for plaintiffs.
    for defendant: Robert S. Saunders, Arthur R. Bookout, and Lilianna Anh P. Townsend, Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP, Wilmington, DE; Gregory P. Williams, Lisa A. Schmidt, Matthew D. Perri, and Angela Lam, Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A., Wilmington, DE; and Matthew Solum, P.C., and Ian Spain, of Kirkland & Ellis LLP, New York, NY for defendants.
    Case Number: D68839

    Stockholders' breach of fiduciary duty claims arising from board's rejection of existing merger agreement in favor of all-cash acquisition offer dismissed where stockholders failed to make prima facie case of board's breach of the duty of loyalty and where acquirer's stake in the company was insufficient to make it a controlling stockholder for the purposes of an aiding and abetting claim.

  • Solak v. Welch

    Publication Date: 2019-11-13
    Practice Area: Corporate Governance
    Industry: Pharmaceuticals
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Vice Chancellor McCormick
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Blake A. Bennett, Cooch and Taylor, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Jeffrey M. Norton, Newman Ferrara LLP, New York, NY; Werner R. Kranenburg, London, United Kingdom for plaintiff.
    for defendant: Edward B. Micheletti, Lilianna Anh P. Townsend and Mary T. Reale, Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP, Wilmington, DE for defendants.
    Case Number: D68773

    A stockholder who made a pre-suit demand on the board could not allege that demand would have been futile in a subsequent complaint concerning the subject matter of the demand.