The Delaware Court of Chancery recently clarified the requirements of Rule 88 which refers to an affidavit that must be submitted when attorneys’ fees are requested from the Court. The short 2-page letter-ruling provides citations to authority and an explanation why the amount of time charged and the rates sought were not in proportion to
attorneys' fees
Delaware high court takes fresh look at Sugarland, affirms $266.7M Dell suit fee award
By Francis Pileggi on
Posted in Delaware Supreme Court Updates
Frank Reynolds, who has been covering Delaware corporate decisions for various national publications for over 35 years, prepared this article
The full Delaware Supreme Court recently ruled that $26.67% fee and expense award to plaintiffs’ attorneys in the $1 billion settlement of a challenge to Dell Technologies Inc.’s redemption of its Class V stock for…
Chancery Explains Standard for Fee Shifting in Connection with Denials in Reply to Requests for Admissions
By Francis Pileggi on
Posted in Court of Chancery Updates
Compared to what might be described as an epistemological analysis of some aspects of Delaware corporate law, this short post is a more practical tool for the toolbox of litigators who can benefit, on a substantive level, from enforcing strict compliance with procedural discovery rules. In the case styled: In re Delaware Public Schools Litigation…
Chancery Addresses Potential Penalties for Failure to Meet Court-Ordered Discovery Deadlines
By Francis Pileggi on
Posted in Court of Chancery Updates
A recent decision by the Delaware Court of Chancery is useful for litigators who need to know what remedies are available when an opposing party does not provide documents required by court-ordered deadlines: Dolan v. Jobu Holdings, LLC, C.A. No. 2020-0962-JRS (Del. Ch. Sept. 2, 2021).
Quick Overview of Case:
In connection with a…
Chancery Clarifies Standard to Shift Fees for Improper Litigation Conduct
By Francis Pileggi on
Posted in Court of Chancery Updates
For the last 16 years, these pages have featured many highlights of court decisions addressing the right of a stockholder, or a member of an LLC, to demand a company’s “books and records“. Regular readers will recall much commentary about why the exercise of such rights are not for the fainthearted.
Why this decision…
Chancery Addresses Contractual Fee-Shifting Where Prevailing Party Is Unclear
By Francis Pileggi on
Posted in Court of Chancery Updates
Applying a contractual fee-shifting provision when it is not clear which party prevailed, is a topic that does not benefit from an extensive body of case law, relatively speaking. The recent Court of Chancery decision in Great Hill Equity Partners IV, LP v. SIG Growth Equity Fund I, LLLP, C.A. No. 7906-VCG (Del. Ch. Dec.…
Chancery Provides Refreshing Section 220 Guidance
By Francis Pileggi on
Posted in Court of Chancery Updates
A recent decision from the Delaware Court of Chancery belongs in the pantheon of consequential court opinions addressing the nuances, first principles and practical challenges regarding Section 220 of the Delaware General Corporation Law. There are many decisions on this topic addressing the right of stockholders to demand inspection of corporate records, but few are…
Delaware Court of Chancery Provides Rule 11 Insights
By Francis Pileggi on
Posted in Court of Chancery Updates
There are relatively few Chancery decisions on Rule 11 compared with more common corporate and commercial litigation issues that are the subject of Chancery opinions, and a recent letter decision provides insights into why there are not more rulings on Rule 11. In POSCO Energy Co., Ltd. v. FuelCell Energy, Inc., Civil Action No.…
Buyer’s Claims Fail Due to Lack of Express Representations by Seller in APA
By Francis Pileggi on
Posted in Court of Chancery Updates
A recent Delaware Court of Chancery decision provides an important lesson about the downside of imprecise drafting, and the need to express with precision how specific risks are to be allocated between the purchaser and seller of a business. In Julius v. Accurus Aerospace Corporation, C.A. No. 2017-0632-MTZ (Del. Ch. Oct. 31, 2019), the…
Rare Instance of Fee Shifting in Section 220 Case
By Francis Pileggi on
Posted in Court of Chancery Updates
Among the multitude of court decisions on DGCL Section 220 highlighted on these pages, a rare bird is the shifting of fees by the court based on the bad-faith exception to the American Rule. In a rare instance that should not be considered anything other than unusual, the Court of Chancery recently granted, in a…