• In Re Straight Path Commc'ns Inc. Consol. Stockholder Litig.

    Publication Date: 2022-03-01
    Practice Area: Mergers and Acquisitions
    Industry: Investments and Investment Advisory | Technology Media and Telecom
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Vice Chancellor Glasscock
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Ned Weinberger,Mark Richardson, Labaton Sucharow LLP, Wilmington, DE; Jeroen van Kwawegen, Edward G. Timlin, Alla Zayenchik, Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann LLP, New York, NY; Vincent R. Cappucci, Joshua K. Porter, Entwistle& Cappucci LLP, New York, NY for plaintiffs.
    for defendant: Rudolf Koch, Kevin M. Gallagher, Daniel E. Kaprow, Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Thomas Uebler, Mccollom D’Emilio Smith Uebler LLC, Wilmington, DE; Jason Cyrulnik, Paul Fattaruso, Evelyn Fruchter, Cyrulnik Fetters LLP, New York, NY; Kevin R. Shannon, Berton W. Ashman, Jr., Jacqueline A. Rogers, David A. Seal, Potter Anderson & Corroon LLP, Wilmington, DE, for defendants

    Case Number: D69726

    The court held that there were disputes over material facts regarding which entity was responsible for indemnifying a claim from a settlement with the Federal Communications Commission such that they precluded entry of summary judgment.

  • February 18, 2022 | Texas Lawyer

    The 10 Largest ERISA Class Action Settlements of 2021

    It was a record year for workplace class action settlements in general, with the top 10 ERISA settlements totaling $837.3 million.

    3 minute read

  • In Re Multiplan Corp. Stockholders' Litig.

    Publication Date: 2022-01-18
    Practice Area: Corporate Governance
    Industry: Investments and Investment Advisory
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Vice Chancellor Will
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Gregory V. Varallo, Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann LLP, Wilmington, DE; Mark Lebovitch, Daniel E. Meyer, Margaret Sanborn- Lowing, Joseph W. Caputo, Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann LLP, New York, NY for plaintiffs.
    for defendant: Raymond J. DiCamillo, Kevin M. Gallagher, Matthew D. Perri, Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Jonathan K. Youngwood, Rachel S. Sparks Bradley, Simpson Thacher & Bartlett LLP, New York, NY; Stephen P. Blake, Simpson Thacher & Bartlett LLP, Palo Alto, CA; Bradley R. Aronstam, S. Michael Sirkin, Ross Aronstam & Moritz LLP, Wilmington, DE; John A. Neuwirth, Joshua S. Amsel, Evert J. Christensen, Jr., Matthew S. Connors, Nicole E. Prunetti, Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP, New York, NY for defendants.

    Case Number: D69679

    The court found that plaintiff's claim was direct, not derivative, the claims were not exclusively contractual, and that the claims were not holder claims predicated on stockholder inaction.

  • In re Kraft Heinz Co.

    Publication Date: 2021-12-28
    Practice Area: Corporate Governance
    Industry: Food and Beverage | Investments and Investment Advisory
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Vice Chancellor Will
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Joel Friedlander, Jeffrey Gorris, Christopher M. Foulds, Friedlander & Gorris P.A., Wilmington, DE; P. Bradford deLeeuw, Deleeuw Law LLC, Wilmington, DE; David A. Jenkins, Robert K. Beste III, Smith, Katzenstein & Jenkins LLP, Wilmington, DE; Eduard Korsinsky, Gregory M. Nespole, Nicholas I. Porritt, Daniel Tepper, Levi & Korsinsky LLP, New York, NY; Jeffrey S. Abraham, Mitchell M. Z. Twersky, Atara Hirsch, Michael J. Klein, Abraham, Fruchter & Twersky, LLP, New York, NY; Lawrence P. Eagel, W. Scott Holleman, Melissa A. Fortunato, Marion C. Passmore, Bragar Eagel & Squire, P.C., New York, NY; Michael VanOverbeke, Vanoverbeke, Michaud & Timmony, P.C., Detroit, MI; Deborah Sturman, Sturman LLC, New York, NY for plaintiffs.
    for defendant: Michael A. Pittenger, Jacqueline A. Rogers, Caneel Radinson-Blasucci, Potter Anderson & Corroon LLP, Wilmington, DE; Sandra C. Goldstein, Stefan Atkinson, Kevin M. Neylan, Jr., Kirkland & Ellis LLP, New York, NY; Matthew D. Stachel, Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP, Wilmington, DE; Daniel J. Kramer, Andrew J. Ehrlich, William A. Clareman, Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP, New York, NY for defendants.

    Case Number: D69657

    The court held that plaintiffs failed to plead sufficient allegations that a majority of the demand board was interested in a stock sale transaction such that demand would be excused.

  • Trumbull Radiologists, Inc. v. Premier Imaging TRI Holdings LLC

    Publication Date: 2021-12-14
    Practice Area: Contracts
    Industry: Health Care | Investments and Investment Advisory
    Court: Delaware Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Johnston
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Dominick T. Gattuso, Aaron M. Nelson, Heyman Enerio Gattuso & Hirzel LLP, Wilmington, DE; Anthony J. O’Malley, Rajeev K. Adlakha, Karey E. Werner, Vorys, Sater, Seymour and Pease LLP, Cleveland, OH for plaintiffs
    for defendant: D. McKinley Measley, Sabrina M. Hendershot, Michael J. Slobom, Jr., Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP, Wilmington, DE; Britt K. Latham, Bass Berry & Sims PLC, Nashville, TN; Shayne R. Clinton, Bass Berry & Sims PLC, Knoxville, TN for defendants

    Case Number: D69642

    The court held that plaintiffs properly pled claims of both breach of contract and breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing; at the pleadings stage, plaintiffs were allowed to maintain both claims. Motion to dismiss denied.

  • December 9, 2021 | New York Law Journal

    Tax Vehicles UnSAFE at Any Speed: What Startup Businesses Should Know About Convertible Debt and Other Instruments

    Convertible debt and other forms of investment, such as simple agreements for future equity (SAFEs), come with dangerous traps for owners of limited liability companies and partnerships.

    7 minute read

  • November 24, 2021 | Daily Business Review

    LA Startup Arc Lands $30 Million for Its $300K Electric Boat

    An all-new, $300,000 electric vehicle is about to drop … in the water. Arc Boat Co., a Los Angeles startup trying to do for watercraft what Tesla…

    3 minute read

  • November 12, 2021 | The Recorder

    Ex-Microsemi CEO Seeks New Fraud Claims Over Failed Tech Company Investment

    A judge has twice denied terminating sanctions requested by the defense, though she recently approved dueling sanctions motions.

    5 minute read

  • Pacira Biosciences, Inc. v. Fortis Advisors LLC

    Publication Date: 2021-11-09
    Practice Area: Mergers and Acquisitions
    Industry: Biotechnology | Investments and Investment Advisory
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Vice Chancellor Fioravanti
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Lisa A. Schmidt, Raymond J. DiCamillo, Megan E. O’Connor, Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Randy M. Mastro, Declan T. Conroy, Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP, New York, NY for plaintiffs.
    for defendant: R. Judson Scaggs, Jr., Lauren K. Neal, Sarah P. Kaboly, Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP, Wilmington, DE; Christopher J. Marino, Davis Malm & D’agostine, P.C., Boston, MA; Henry E. Gallagher, Jr., Shaun Michael Kelly, Jarrett W. Horowitz, Connolly Gallagher LLP, Wilmington, DE for defendants.

    Case Number: D69603

    Claims that former owners and employees of acquired company improperly interfered with acquirer's operation of the business were dismissed where the parties' merger agreement contained no express non-compete/non-interference language and defendants' cited actions did not rise to the level of bad faith interference or communication with the acquirer's employees.

  • November 3, 2021 | Corporate Counsel

    Shifting Sands: ESG Disclosure Considerations Impacting Public Companies

    This article highlights key process considerations public companies can assess as they approach ESG disclosures in this uncertain environment.

    6 minute read