Showing 179 posts from 2006.
Court of Chancery Holds Veto Power May Constitute Control
Posted In Controlling Stockholder
Williamson v. Cox Communications, Inc., C.A. No. 1663-N, 2006 WL 1686375 (Del. Ch. June 5, 2006).
For the first time, the Court of Chancery has ruled that the power to veto a transaction may constitute the power to control a Delaware corporation. This is significant because a controlling stockholder has fiduciary duties to the other stockholders. While the facts of this case are probably unique and its implication for the litigants are unclear at this early stage, the complaint has withstood a motion to dismiss.
Share
Court of Chancery Aids The Missing Stockholder
Posted In Books and Records
Gildor v. Optical Solutions, Inc., C.A. No. 1416-N, 2006 WL 1596678 (Del. Ch. June 5, 2006).
It is often not clear what a corporation is to do when it cannot find a missing stockholder. While 8 Del. C. §230 answers that question for stockholder meetings, what to do in other circumstances is less clear. In this decision, the Court of Chancery held that the corporation should at least look through its records to try to find the missing stockholder to give him notice of the right to acquire corporate stock. The failure to try harder led the court to extend the stockholder's time when he finally appeared.
Share
Court of Chancery Appoints Receiver To Remedy Breach of Duty
Kevin McGovern, et. al. v. General Holding, Inc., et. al., C.A. No. 1296-N (Del. Ch. June 2, 2006). In this action to recover for the diversion of partnership property, the Court of Chancery fashioned a unique remedy by ordering that the partnership be sold by a receiver so as to realize the special value of its technology. More › ShareCourt of Chancery Rescues Janitor
Posted In Business Torts
Elite Cleaning Company, Inc. v. Capel, C.A. No. 690-N, 2006 WL 1565161 (Del. Ch. June 2, 2006).
In this precedent setting case, the Court of Chancery refused to enforce a non-compete agreement against a janitor of the Elite Cleaning Company, apparently concluding his services were not so elite after all. More ›
Share
District Court Grants Leave to File Third-Party Complaint
Posted In Breach of Contract
Federal Insurance Company v. Lighthouse Construction, Inc., 230 F.R.D. 387 (D. Del. 2005).
A property insurer brought a subrogation action against a building contractor to recover for loss caused by a roof collapse. The contractor sought leave to filed third-party complaint against erection contractor. Insurer also sought leave to filed a claim against it.
The District Court held:
(1) the contractor was entitled to add third-party claim of contractual indemnification against erection contractor;
(2) the insurer could not assert claim against third-party defendant after expiration of two-year statute of limitations; and
(3) insurer's amendment of complaint to add erection contractor would not relate back to subrogation action against building contractor.
Share
Court of Chancery Orders Parties to Modify Release Language in Settlement Agreement
Unisuper Ltd. v. News Corp., C.A. No. 1699-N, 2006 WL 1550809 (Del. Ch. May 31, 2006) News Corporation shareholder objected to settlement, arguing the release was overly broad. More › ShareCourt of Chancery Grants Defendants' Motion to Dismiss Where Plaintiffs Asserted Derivative, Not Direct, Claim and Failed to Make Demand or Establish Demand Was Excused
Posted In Derivative Claims
Gatz v. Ponsoldt, C.A. No. 174-N, 2006 WL 1510467 (Del. Ch. May 26, 2006).
Plaintiffs asserted direct claim arising from recapitalization. Defendants moved to dismiss, arguing that Plaintiffs' claim was actually derivative, not direct, and Plaintiffs had failed to make demand or establish demand was excused. More ›
Share
Court of Chancery Grants Summary Judgment for Defendants in Case Arising From Interpretation of Limited Partnership Agreement
Anglo American Security Fund, L.P. v. S.R. Global Int'l Fund, L.P., C.A. No. 20066-N, 2006 WL 1494360 (Del. Ch. May 24, 2006). Plaintiffs and defendants brought cross-motions for summary judgment on claims arising from disputes over interpretation of limited partnership agreement ("LPA"). More › ShareCourt of Chancery Grants Motion for Summary Judgment in Favor of Arbitration of Dispute
Posted In Arbitration
Delta & Pine Land Co. v. Monsanto Co., C.A. No. 1970-N, 2006 WL 1510417 (Del. Ch. May 24, 2006).
Plaintiff moved for summary judgment on its claim for arbitration of a dispute with Defendant. More ›
Share
District Court Denies Defendants' Motion to Dismiss Securities Class Action Pursuant to the Heightened Pleading Requirements of the PSLRA.
Posted In Class Actions
In re Veritas Software Corp. Securities Litig., C.A. No. 04-831-SLR (Consol.) (D. Del. May 23, 2006). Defendants moved to dismiss a consolidated securities class action that alleged violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the "Exchange Act") and Rule 10b-5 on the grounds that the plaintiffs failed to allege fraud with particularity as required by the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 (the "PSLRA"). More ›
ShareCourt of Chancery Grants Plaintiffs' Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings on Claim for Attorneys' Fees and Expenses Incurred in Bringing Action
Lillis v. AT&T Corp., C.A. No. 717-N, 2006 WL 1468709 (Del. Ch. May 22, 2006). Plaintiffs moved pursuant to Court of Chancery Rule 12(c) for judgment on the pleadings on one count of their complaint, which sought attorneys' fees and expenses incurred in bringing the case. More › ShareDistrict Court Dismisses Breach of Contract and Misappropriation of Trade Secrets Action for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction
Posted In Breach of Contract, Jurisdiction
Childcraft Education Corp. v. Alice's Home, et al., C.A. No. 05-461 (GMS) (D. Del. May 22, 2006).
Plaintiff filed complaint alleging breach of contract, miappropriation of trade secrets and unjust enrichment claims. Defendants moved to dismiss the action for lack of personal jurisdiction. More ›
Share
Court of Chancery Finds Majority Stakeholder, Chief Executive Officer and General Partner of Limited Partnership Breached His Fiduciary and Contractual Duties to Limited Partnership
McGovern v. General Holding, Inc., C.A. No. 1296-N, 2006 WL 1468850 (Del. Ch. May 18, 2006). Plaintiffs brought action individually and on behalf of limited partnership against 90% owner of limited partnership for, among other things, breach of fiduciary duty and breach of limited partnership agreement. More › ShareSuperior Court Grants AT&T Corp. Leave to Appeal Interlocutory Order Granting Summary Judgment
Posted In Business Insurance, Directors
AT&T Corp. v. Clarendon America Ins. Co., C.A. No. 04C-11-167(JRJ), 2006 WL 1360934 (Del. Super. Ct. May 18, 2006).
On April 25, 2006, the Superior Court granted summary judgment in favor of multiple defendants. The plaintiff, AT&T, moved to certify an appeal pursuant to Rule 42, and the Superior Court granted AT&T leave to file and interlocutory appeal. On May 31, 2006, the Delaware Supreme Court accepted the interlocutory appeal as well. More ›
Share