Johnson v. Smithkline Beecham Corp., 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 11501 (3d Cir. June 7, 2013).
Issue Addressed: For purposes of diversity jurisdiction, should a holding company’s citizenship be defined by the activities of its limited liability company (LLC) subsidiary given that a holding company’s primary activity is to own and manage, not
National Industries Group (Holding) v. Carlyle Investment Management LLC, Del. Supr., No. 596, 2012 (May 29, 2013).
Issues Addressed: Enforceability of a forum selection clause, and the prerequisites to vacate a judgment under Court of Chancery Rule 60(b)(6).
Brief Background
This case involved a dispute between two sophisticated entities. One was based in Kuwait
Boulden v. Albiorix, Inc., C.A. No. 7051-VCN (Del. Ch. Jan. 31, 2013, revised Feb. 7, 2013).
Issue Addressed
This case addressed whether personal jurisdiction was appropriate by a court in Delaware on the various foreign residents involved.
Short Overview
The Court reviews the requirements for personal jurisdiction under Delaware’s long-arm statute, as well
In Matthew v. Flakt Woods Group SA, Del. Supr., No. 150, 2012 (Nov. 20, 2012), the Delaware Supreme Court ruled that Delaware courts could impose jurisdiction on a foreign party involved in this case, based on the “conspiracy theory of jurisdiction”.
Quick Background: This well-recognized basis for subjecting non-Delaware parties to the jurisdiction of
New Media Holding Co., LLC v. Brown, C.A. No. 7516-CS (Del. Ch. Nov. 14, 2012).
Issue addressed: Does Delaware have jurisdiction over the manager of a limited liability partnership (LLP) accused of breach of fiduciary duty claims, based on acts taken in the course of his work for the LLP, absent acts taken
Picard v. Wood, C.A. No. 6526-VCG (Del. Ch. July 12, 2012).
Issue Presented
Whether a member of a limited partnership is subject to personal jurisdiction in Delaware based on that status alone.
Short Answer: No.
Brief Overview
This short letter ruling granted a motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction, for claims
Many readers of this blog know that officers and directors of Delaware corporations as well as managers of LLCs, and those who play similar roles in other alternative entities, are subject to personal jurisdiction in Delaware courts based on what are referred to as “implied consent statutes”. In sum, these statutes provide that when one
RWI Acquisition LLC v. Todd, C.A. No. 6902-VCP (Del. Ch. May 30, 2012).
Issues Addressed
(1) Whether the Court of Chancery had personal jurisdiction over the member of a Delaware LLC; and (2) Whether the Court could or should stay the first-filed Delaware action, sua sponte, in favor of a later-filed related proceeding in
In Reid v. Siniscalchi, C.A. No. 2874-VCN (May 25, 2012), the Court addressed a request for additional deposition discovery requested by the plaintiff to prove that the Court had jurisdiction over the defendants.
Issue Addressed:
Whether the court had personal jurisdiction over certain corporate defendants (the “Entity Defendants”), and whether the Court should
Professor Eric Chiappinelli challenges the director-consent statute that imposes personal jurisdiction in Delaware over those who serve as directors of Delaware corporations. The good professor has published a provocative article that challenges the validity of this often invoked Delaware statute. The theory behind the so-called “consent statute” is that by virtue of agreeing to be