Don’t forget you can visit MyAlerts to manage your alerts at any time.
398 results for 'K/////// court:"Delaware Supreme Court"' You can use Search Constraints to get even better search results
March 14, 2018 | Delaware Business Court Insider
In Arch Insurance v. Murdock, a D&O insurance coverage dispute, the Superior Court's complex commercial litigation division reasoned broadly to hold that, absent a contrary choice of law clause, Delaware law applies to Delaware corporations' D&O insurance policies, and that Delaware public policy does not prohibit insuring losses from insureds' breaching the fiduciary duty of loyalty through fraudulent conduct.
1 minute read
February 14, 2018 | The Legal Intelligencer
Olufunke O. Leroy joined the Philadelphia office of Fox Rothschild as an associate in the firm's real estate department.
1 minute read
February 7, 2018 | New York Law Journal
Corporate Litigation columnists Joseph M. McLaughlin and Shannon K. McGovern write: A recent Delaware Supreme Court en banc decision has ended uncertainty in Delaware and potentially elsewhere introduced when two Court of Chancery decisions urged that a longstanding derivative preclusion rule violates due process.
1 minute read
Publication Date: 2018-02-07
Practice Area: Corporate Entities | Corporate Governance
Industry: Retail
Court: Delaware Supreme Court
Judge: Justice Valihura
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Stuart M. Grant, Michael J. Barry, and Nathan A. Cook; Grant & Eisenhofer, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Christine S. Azar, Ryan T. Keating, and Ned Weinberger, Labaton Sucharow LLP, Wilmington, DE; Daniel Girard, Amanda Steiner, Dena Sharp, Adam Polk, and Jordan Elias, Girard Gibbs LLP, San Francisco, CA; Thomas A. Dubbs, Louis Gottlieb, and Jeffrey A. Dubbin, Labaton Sucharow LLP, New York, NY; Frederic S. Fox, Hae Sung Nam, Donald R. Hall, and Jeffrey P. Campisi, Kaplan Fox & Kilsheimer LLP, New York, NY, attorneys for appellants
for defendant: Donald. J. Wolfe, Steven C. Norman, and Tyler J. Leavengood, Potter Anderson & Corroon LLP, Wilmington, DE; Theodore J. Boutrous and Alexander K. Mircheff, Gibson Dunn & Crutcher LLP, Los Angeles, CA; Mark A. Perry, Gibson Dunn & Crutcher LLP, Washington, DC, attorneys for appellees.
Case Number: D68031
Another jurisdiction's dismissal of derivative action for lack of demand futility had preclusive effect under federal law upon competing group of stockholders derivative litigation.
Publication Date: 2017-12-27
Practice Area: Civil Appeals | Regulation
Industry: Entertainment and Leisure
Court: Delaware Supreme Court
Judge: Justice Valihura
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Francis G.X. Pileggi and Alexandra D. Rogin, Eckert Seamans Cherin & Mellott, LLC, Wilmington, DE, attorneys for appellants
for defendant: Ralph K. Durstein and Devera B. Scott, State of Delaware Department of Justice, Dover, DE, attorneys for appellees.
Case Number: D67983
State agencies lacked authority to impose regulations amount to near-total ban on lawful firearms in state parks and forests, where Delaware Constitution protected citizens rights to bear lawful arms both inside and outside the home for the defense of self and family.
November 13, 2017 | New York Law Journal
John A. Neuwirth, Joshua S. Amsel, Christine T. Di Guglielmo and Evert J. Christensen Jr. write: Since 'Trulia', there has been a decline in Delaware in the number of run-of-the-mill challenges to nearly every public company merger transaction. But while the volume of merger litigation in Delaware has been on the decline, there has been a noticeable surge in filings in other jurisdictions, particularly federal courts.
1 minute read
Publication Date: 2017-10-11
Practice Area: Corporate Entities
Industry:
Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
Judge: District Judge Sleet
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant: David L. Finger and David B. Goldstein for plaintiff Philip R. Shawe; Jeremy D. Eicher for plaintiff Shirley Shawe; Douglas D. Herman, John K. Villa, Charles Davant IV and Anne M. Rucker for defendant Robert B. Pincus; Joseph C. Handlon, Lauren E. Maguire and Ryan P. Connell for defendant Jeffrey W. Bullock.
Case Number: D67901
The federal court lacked subject matter jurisdiction over plaintiffs action which they filed after receiving an adverse state court ruling in a related matter. Motion to dismiss granted.
Publication Date: 2017-09-26
Practice Area: Civil Procedure
Industry:
Court: U.S. District Court, Southern District
Judge: District Judge Vernon Broderick
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Counsel for Plaintiff: Andrew J. Goodman, Jeanne C. Barenholtz, Malcolm Seymour, Garvey Schubert Barer, New York, NY.
for defendant: Counsel for Defendants: John K. Villa, Anne M. Rucker, William T. Burke, Williams & Connolly LLP, Washington, DC. Jonathan D. Lupkin Lupkin & Associates PLLC New York, NY.
Case Number: 16-CV-5936
42 USC §1983 Challenge to Delaware Court's Order Dismissed Under 'Younger' Do
September 20, 2017 | New York Law Journal
A federal judge on Tuesday dismissed a lawsuit accusing the chancellor of Delaware's Chancery Court and a court-appointed custodian of stifling the free-speech rights of a TransPerfect Global Inc. employee in connection with the forced sale of the profitable translation-services company.
1 minute read
September 18, 2017 |
Click Here for FC&S Legal Expert Analysis Lee v. GEICO Choice Ins. Co.Superior Court of Delaware, New CastleAugust 23, 2017, Submitted; September…
1 minute read
Legal Speak is a weekly podcast that makes sense of what’s happening in the legal industry.
