Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

Features

Delaware Corporate Law and Chancery Review Image

Delaware Corporate Law and Chancery Review

Francis G. X. Pileggi

<b><I>Key Decisions from DE's Supreme Court and Court of Chancery</I></b><p>A few recent decisions from the Delaware Court of Chancery provide practical guidance for corporate executives regarding the standard of review that the courts will apply to challenges to executive compensation decisions.

Features

Court of Chancery Dismisses Post-Closing Challenge to Merger Transaction Image

Court of Chancery Dismisses Post-Closing Challenge to Merger Transaction

Lewis H. Lazarus

Stockholders who believe that a board breached its fiduciary duties in connection with information provided to stockholders asked to vote for a merger transaction can either seek to enjoin the transaction or seek damages post-closing. In light of the Delaware courts' jurisprudence post-<i>Corwin</i>, such claims are unlikely to succeed

Features

General Personal Jurisdiction in Aviation Cases After <i>Daimler</i> Image

General Personal Jurisdiction in Aviation Cases After <i>Daimler</i>

Steven R. Pounian & Justin T. Green

<I>Daimler's</I> impact is seen in a growing number of decisions where courts have dismissed actions because they found that the corporate defendants' business connections to the jurisdictions were not sufficient to justify general jurisdiction.

Features

DE Chancery Court Strikes Down Fee-Shifting Bylaw Image

DE Chancery Court Strikes Down Fee-Shifting Bylaw

Gary W. Lipkin, Alexandra Rogin & Justin M. Forcier

In <i>Solak v. Sarowitz</i>, the Delaware Court of Chancery held that a corporate bylaw ran afoul of 8 Del. C. Section 109(b), as recently amended, where it purported to shift attorney fees and expenses to an unsuccessful stockholder that filed an internal corporate claim outside of the state of Delaware.

Need Help?

  1. Prefer an IP authenticated environment? Request a transition or call 800-756-8993.
  2. Need other assistance? email Customer Service or call 1-877-256-2472.

MOST POPULAR STORIES

  • Surveys in Patent Infringement Litigation: The Next Frontier
    Most experienced intellectual property attorneys understand the significant role surveys play in trademark infringement and other Lanham Act cases, but relatively few are likely to have considered the use of such research in patent infringement matters. That could soon change in light of the recent admission of a survey into evidence in <i>Applera Corporation, et al. v. MJ Research, Inc., et al.</i>, No. 3:98cv1201 (D. Conn. Aug. 26, 2005). The survey evidence, which showed that 96% of the defendant's customers used its products to perform a patented process, was admitted as evidence in support of a claim of inducement to infringe. The court admitted the survey into evidence over various objections by the defendant, who had argued that the inducement claim could not be proven without the survey.
    Read More ›
  • Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
    With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
    Read More ›