Amirsaleh v. Board of Trade of the City of New York, Inc., No. 75, 2010 (Del. Supr. Aug. 16, 2011), read Delaware Supreme Court opinion here. Prior decisions by the Court of Chancery (and a video/audio clip of trial court proceedings), were highlighted on these pages here, here, here, here and here.
Delaware Supreme Court Affirms Deviation from Statute of Limitations, in Applying Doctrine of Latches
On August 11, 2011, the Delaware Supreme Court en banc, in IAC/Interactivecorp. v. O’Brien, No. 629, 2010, affirmed a decision of the Court of Chancery on an issue that goes to the very core of one of the Court of Chancery’s equitable defenses — laches. While the issue that the Supreme Court addressed seemed
Delaware Supreme Court Addresses Electronic Discovery Issues
The Delaware Supreme Court, in Genger v. TR Investors, recently addressed electronic discovery issues in the context of sanctions imposed in the amount of about $4 million by the Court of Chancery, for spoliation. We highlighted the case on these pages here. Kevin Brady, a nationally recognized electronic discovery expert, provides a
Delaware Supreme Court Denies Appeal of Chancery’s Refusal to Enjoin Dynegy Restructuring
In Roseton OL, LLC v. Dynegy Holdings, Inc., No. 401-2011 (Del. Supr. Aug. 5, 2011), the Delaware Supreme Court today denied an interlocutory appeal from a decision of the Court of Chancery that refused to grant a TRO to creditors of Dynegy who sought to enjoin a restructuring that would transfer assets, arguably used for
Court of Chancery Clarifies Basis for Determining Amount of Bond for Preliminary Injunction
Service Corporation of Westover Hills v. Guzzetta, C.A. No. 2922-VCP (Del. Ch. July 21, 2011), read opinion here. The Delaware Supreme Court’s remand decision in this case last year was highlighted on this blog here. The importance of this case is not dependent on most of the pedestrian facts involved, so the reader
Delaware Supreme Court Addresses Electronic Discovery Issues and DGCL Section 225 Claims
In Genger v. TR Investors, LLC, No. 592, 2010 (Del. Supr., July 18, 2011), read opinion here, the Delaware Supreme Court addresses electronic discovery issues and contested elections for directors, in a 45-page opinion that warrants close examination by those engaged in business litigation. This short post will highlight a few “bullet points” until
Supreme Court Rejects the Requirement of Actual Harm for Insider Trading in Brophy Claim
On June 20, 2011, the Delaware Supreme Court in Kahn v. Kolberg Kravis Roberts & Co., L.P., No. 436,2010 (June 20, 2011), reversed and remanded a decision by the Court of Chancery interpreting “a Brophy claim as explained in Pfeiffer.” Read opinion here. For those readers who do not practice in the Court of
Supreme Court Decides Due Process is Violated by Biased Member of Panel Despite Unanimous Vote
The Delaware Supreme Court decided an issue of first impression this month in a ruling that exemplified the symbol for justice (at left), blindfolded (indicating impartiality) and holding level scales (for fairness).
In Sullivan v. Elsmere, No. 467, 2010(Del. Supr. June 17, 2011), Delaware’s High Court, sitting en banc, ruled that when one member
Delaware Supreme Court Affirms Use of Poison Pill to Reject Attempt to Gain Control of Barnes & Noble
On March 3, 2011, the Delaware Supreme Court issued a one-page decision affirming Vice Chancellor Strine’s decision in Yucaipa American Alliance Fund II, L.P. v. Riggio, C.A. No. 5465-VCS (Del. Ch. Aug. 12, 2010), dismissing claims of breach of fiduciary duties and finding that Barnes & Noble (“B&N”) had proven at trial that its
Delaware Supreme Court Affirms Finding of No Discrimination Against Audience at Tyler Perry Movie
Boggerty v. Stewart, No. 489-2010 (Del. Supr. Feb. 17, 2011). See overview of affirmed trial court opinion which provides more background facts, available here. The genesis of this case was a complaint about the manager of a movie theater telling an audience before the start of a Tyler Perry movie to turn off their