Don’t forget you can visit MyAlerts to manage your alerts at any time.
322 results for 'K////// industry:"Investments and Investment Advisory"' You can use Search Constraints to get even better search results
Publication Date: 2023-07-31
Practice Area: Corporate Governance
Industry: Investments and Investment Advisory | Technology Media and Telecom
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Vice Chancellor Glasscock
Attorneys: For plaintiff: F. Troupe Mickler IV, Stephen E. Jenkins, Ashby & Geddes, P.A., Wilmington, DE; William J. Fields, Christopher J. Kupka, Samir Shukurov, Fields Kupka & Shukurov LLP, New York, NY; Gustavo F. Bruckner, Samuel J. Adams, Daryoush Behbood, Pomerantz LLP, New York, NY; Brian Schall, The Schall Law Firm, Los Angeles, CA for plaintiffs.
for defendant: Kevin R. Shannon, Tyler J. Leavengood, Jaclyn C. Levy, Michael C. Gorski, Jr., Lucille E. Wiesner, Potter Anderson & Corroon LLP, Wilmington, DE; Richard B. Harper, Vern Cassin, Thomas E. O’Brien, Alyssa M. Pronley, Kristina Wenner, Baker Botts LLP, New York, NY; Bradley R. Aronstam, S. Reiko Rogozen, Roger S. Stronach, Ross Aronstam & Moritz LLP, Wilmington, DE; Joseph O. Larkin, Matthew P. Majarian, Rupal K. Joshi, Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP, Wilmington, DE; James R. Carroll, Skadden, Arps, Meagher & Flom LLP, Boston, MA for defendants.
Case Number: 2021-1116-SG
The court denied defendants' motion to dismiss plaintiffs' derivative complaint which alleged that one defendant had made a sham offer to purchase another defendant's high vote stock to trigger a call right, which in turn resulted in significant monetary benefits to both defendants and harm to nominal defendant.
July 24, 2023 | The Legal Intelligencer
The multiple civil and criminal cases involving the founders of Par Funding have drawn in a number of Philadelphia's top law firms and litigators.
9 minute read
Publication Date: 2023-07-24
Practice Area: Labor Law
Industry: Investments and Investment Advisory | Manufacturing
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Judge: Judge Chagares
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Sarah M. Adams, Michael J. Prame, Groom Law Group Chartered, Washington, DC; Mark A. Nebrig, Moore & Van Allen, Charlotte, NC; Kevin J. Connors, Marshall Dennehey Warner Coleman & Goggin, P.C., Wilmington, DE for appellants.
for defendant: Daniel Feinberg, Feinberg Jackson Worthman & Wasow, Berkeley, CA; David A. Felice, Bailey & Glasser LLP, Wilmington, DE. Ryan T. Jenny, Gregory Y. Porter, Bailey & Glasser LLP, Washington, D.C.; Peter K. Stris, Rachana A. Pathak, John R. Stokes, Stris & Maher LLP, Los Angeles, CA; Tillman J. Breckenridge, Stris & Maher LLP, Washington, DC for appellee.
Case Number: 21-2801
Nonseverable class action waiver in ESOP plan's arbitration provision rendered provision unenforceable where waiver barred plan participants from pursuing remedies authorized by ERISA.
June 28, 2023 | Legaltech News
DraftWise is the third legal tech startup that leverages generative AI to secure investment just over the past four weeks.
2 minute read
June 15, 2023 | Corporate Counsel
Chad Perry is the new executive vice president and general counsel at the high-end hotel investment company.
2 minute read
May 17, 2023 | New Jersey Law Journal
Many individuals remain wary of 529 accounts because the use of these funds is limited to educational purposes. However, hidden incentives and benefits may make these accounts worth another look in your client's estate plan.
7 minute read
May 9, 2023 | Daily Business Review
Republican lawmakers like Fla. Gov. Ron DeSantis have targeted the concept as they lean into culture war issues, but clients' demands for advice haven't ceased.
5 minute read
Publication Date: 2023-05-09
Practice Area: Mergers and Acquisitions
Industry: Biotechnology | Investments and Investment Advisory
Court: Court of Chancery
Judge: Vice Chancellor Glasscock
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Stephen E. Jenkins, Samuel M. Gross, Ashby & Geddes, Wilmington, DE; Donald J. Enright, Elizabeth K. Tripodi, Jordan A. Cafritz, Levi & Korsinsky, LLP, Washington, DC for plaintiff.
for defendant: Raymond J. DiCamillo, Kevin M. Gallagher, Kyle H. Lachmund, Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Adam H. Offenhartz, M. Jonathan Seibald, Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP, New York, NY; Kevin M. Coen, Stephanie Rudolph, Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP, Wilmington, DE; Scott B. Czerwonka, Andrea S. Brooks, Wilks Law, LLC, Wilmington, DE; Kurt M. Heyman, Jamie L. Brown, Heyman Enerio Gattuso & Hirzel LLP, Wilmington, DE; John F. Baughman, Daniel A. Schwartz, JFB Legal, PLLC, Norfolk, VA for defendants.
Case Number: 2022-0130-SG
Former stockholder plausibly alleged fiduciary claims against controller as it received non-ratable benefit from sale of the company and attempted to induce minority stockholders to waive any fiduciary claims to receive their merger consideration.
April 18, 2023 | The American Lawyer
Reliance on work that propelled firms into the upper echelons of the industry may no longer be a safe bet. But there are other ways to approach private capital.
5 minute read
Publication Date: 2023-04-11
Practice Area: Mergers and Acquisitions
Industry: Investments and Investment Advisory
Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
Judge: District Judge Noreika
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Sue L. Robinson, Brian E. Farnan, Michael J. Farnan, Farnan LLP, Wilmington, DE; Andrew J. Entwistle, Entwistle & Cappucci LLP, Austin, TX; Vincent R. Cappucci, Arthur V. Nealon, Brendan J. Brodeur, Jonathan H. Beemer, Jessica A. Margulis, Entwistle & Cappucci LLP, New York, NY; Marc M. Seltzer, Krysta Kauble Pachman, Susman Godfrey L.L.P., Los Angeles, CA for plaintiffs.
for defendant: A. Thompson Bayliss, April M. Ferraro, Christopher Fitzpatrick Cannataro, Abrams & Bayliss LLP, Wilmington, DE; Alan S. Goudiss, K. Mallory Brennan, Sherman & Sterling LLP, New York, NY; Christian E. Myrold, Shearman & Sterling LLP, San Francisco, CA; Matthew D. Stachel, Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP, Wilmington, DE; Jaren Janghorbani, Geoffrey Chepiga, Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP, New York, NY for defendants.
Case Number: 20-275 (MN) (JLH)
Court hearing claims under §14(a) properly excluded shareholders who sold their stock after the merger approval vote but before closing, since their alleged pecuniary injury did not directly arise from the challenged merger.
Legal Speak is a weekly podcast that makes sense of what’s happening in the legal industry.
