In a recent bench ruling, the Delaware Court of Chancery addressed an issue that it acknowledged had not been squarely decided by the court in a prior published decision: corporate counsel’s role and scope of engagement for a two-member deadlocked board. In Kundrun v. AMCI Group, LLC, C.A. No. 2025-0570-LM-VCL (Del. Ch. Oct. 22

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

Recent developments in AI allow for summaries of court decisions without the need, in theory, for much human input. So, what is the usefulness of blogs by lawyers (such as this one–now in its 20th year) that cover a particular legal topic if AI can do so much of the work? The answer is: insights

A recent Delaware Court of Chancery ruling addressed the scope of discovery in connection with a dispute about a failed merger to the extent that “deeply personal” and embarrassing information about a CEO was sought, purportedly in connection with the role the CEO played in the alleged failure of his company to use contractually mandated