Delaware Corporate and Commercial Litigation

The Delaware Supreme Court recently reinstated the compensation package that Tesla awarded to Elon Musk and that the Delaware Court of Chancery invalidated in two separate prior rulings, in the matter styled In re Tesla, Inc. Derivative Litigation, Del. Supr., No. 534, 2024 (Dec.19,2025). As one might expect, commentary about this ruling has already

Frank Reynolds, who has been covering Delaware corporate decisions for various national publications for over 40 years, prepared this article.

The Delaware Court of Chancery recently barred Credit Glory Inc.‘s president from bringing breach of fiduciary duty claims against an ex-officer/director of their credit aid company based on the same ‘” abhorrent” sexual harassment conduct

A recent Delaware Court of Chancery decision is noteworthy for several key principles applied to a set of facts that involve company counsel using corporate machinery and corporate funds to join with a faction of the board to oust a board member. Dalby v. Kastner, C.A. No. 2025-0136-NAC (Del. Ch. Aug. 29, 2025), is

A recent Delaware Court of Chancery decision explained why a lack of candor resulted in discovery abuses that justified fee-shifting. In Legent Group, LLC v. Axos Financial, Inc., C.A. No. 2020-0405-KSJM (Del. Ch. Nov. 7, 2025), the court explained the factual basis for its findings that the lack of candor created unnecessary expenses, requiring

Frank Reynolds, who has been covering Delaware corporate decisions for various national publications for over 40 years, prepared this article.

The Chancellor of the Delaware Court of Chancery recently allowed a Regions Bank investor to continue her derivative Caremark suit against bank directors to recover the $191 million dollars Regions paid federal banking regulators for

I’m attending today a symposium hosted by the above center at the University of Delaware, organized by the center’s head, Prof. Larry Cunningham. The title is: “Boardroom Legacy: Weinbergs of Goldman Sachs & The Evolution of Courtroom Governance”.

The impetus of the convocation is the 1948 Princeton senior paper of John Weinberg, that has never