Don’t forget you can visit MyAlerts to manage your alerts at any time.
21 results for 'Susman Godfrey/// industry:"Financial Services and Banking"' You can use Search Constraints to get even better search results
September 26, 2023 | Litigation Daily
With a helpful nudge from the federal judge overseeing a case alleging a rate-setting conspiracy in the market for variable rate demand obligations, Quinn associates David LeRay and Nicolas Siebert successfully argued that the plaintiffs' expert opinions supported class certification.
5 minute read
March 2, 2023 | New York Law Journal
In a summary order, Circuit Judges Dennis Jacobs, Eunice Lee and Myrna Pérez ruled that a district judge did not abuse his discretion when he dismissed the first amended complaint or when he denied Black leave to file the second amended complant.
3 minute read
Publication Date: 2023-02-06
Practice Area: Creditors' and Debtors' Rights
Industry: Financial Services and Banking
Court: Appellate Division, First Department
Judge: Justice Sallie Manzanet-Daniels
Attorneys: For plaintiff: For Appellant: Jason M. Koral of counsel, Press Koral LLP, New York, Elliot H. Scherker and Brigid F. Cech of the bar of the State of Florida, admitted pro hac vice, of counsel, and Greenberg Traurig, P.A., Miami, FL.
for defendant: For Selling Source, LLC, London Bay-TSS Acquisition Company, LLC, Datax, LTD., Partnerweekly, L.L.C., Leadrev Holding, LLC, 19 Communications, LLC, Idesktopmedia.com, LLC, Email React, LLC, FPG, LLC, Impeerian Insurance Agency of Nevada, LLC, Lead Silo, LLC, Mark Holdings, LLC, Q Interactive LLC, Kitara Media, LLC, Clickgen, LLC, OG Logistics, LLC, Duck Play, LLC, Play Nomy, LLC, and Play Turtle, LLC, Respondents: Mark H. Hatch-Miller and Komal Patel of counsel, Susman Godfrey L.L.P., New York.
For White Oak Global, Respondent: Niall D. Ó. Murchadha, John M. Lundin and Cynthia L. Botello of counsel, Lundin PLLC, New York.
Case Number: 654291/13
ICA Standstill Provision Bars Action; Senior Lender White Oak Has Priority Over Intrepid
September 8, 2022 | Texas Lawyer
The parties agreed that the bellwether opinion on the question of whether the contract has a provision permitting fee recovery is Hooper Associates v. AGS Computers, New York Court of Appeals.
3 minute read
November 3, 2021 | Litigation Daily
On Monday, a federal jury in Hartford, Connecticut found that four separate crypto assets were not securities in what appears to be the first time jurors in the Second Circuit, if not the whole country, were asked to consider whether a particular cryptocurrency was a security or not.
4 minute read
August 30, 2021 | Litigation Daily
A group of 49 law firms came together late last week to issue a statement saying the central claim of the derivative suits targeting certain special purpose acquisition companies are "without factual or legal basis."
4 minute read
Publication Date: 2021-03-03
Practice Area: Insurance Law
Industry: Financial Services and Banking | Insurance | Investments and Investment Advisory
Court: Delaware Superior Court
Judge: Judge Wallace
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Donald L. Gouge, Jr., Donald L. Gouge, Jr., LLC, Wilmington, DE; Michael J. Miller, Joseph M. Kelleher Philip J. Farinella, Cozen O’Connor, Philadelphia, PA for plaintiff.
for defendant: Steven L. Caponi, Matthew B. Goeller, K&L Gates LLP, Wilmington, DE; Ari Ruben, Susman Godfrey LLP, New York, NY; Steven G. Sklaver, Susman Godfrey LLP, Los Angeles, CA for defendant.
Case Number: D69312
Although stranger-oriented life insurance policy holder could not maintain void policy under theories of estoppel or waiver, insurance company's acceptance of holder as owner and beneficiary and acceptance of payment of premiums could support fraud claim against insurer.
Publication Date: 2021-02-03
Practice Area: Commercial Law
Industry: Financial Services and Banking | Insurance
Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
Judge: District Judge Noreika
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Donald L. Gouge, Jr., Donald L. Gouge, Jr., LLC, Wilmington, DE; Michael J. Miller, Joseph M. Kelleher, Philip J. Farinella, Cozen O’Connor, Philadelphia, PA for plaintiff.
for defendant: Steven L. Caponi, Matthew B. Goeller, K&L Gates LLP, Wilmington, DE; Steven Sklaver, Susman Godfrey LLP, Los Angeles, CA; Ari Ruben, Susman Godfrey LLP, New York, NY for defendant.
Case Number: D69281
Removal to federal court by a non-party was improper, and defendant's attempt to file an amended notice of removal did not relate back to the time of the original notice.
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.
August 12, 2020 | Law.com
The orders don't bode well for lawyers still waiting on the panel's decision about lawsuits against insurance firms over business interruption claims
1 minute read
Legal Speak is a weekly podcast that makes sense of what’s happening in the legal industry.
