Cases

IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE WILLIAM RICHARD KRUSE, ) individually and as TRUSTEE for THE ) VIVIAN CALVERT KRUSE LIVING ) TRUST and THE WILLIAM ) RICHARD KRUSE LIVING TRUST, ) ) Petitioners, ) ) v. ) C.A. No. 12392-VCS ) SYNA

SPALLONE, J. The defendants, Synapse Technologies, Inc., and its chief executive officer, Floyd Wallace III, (hereinafter referred to jointly as the defendant) having been found hable to the plaintiff pursuant to a contract between the parties, appeal from the judgment of the trial court rendered by a state trial referee. On appeal, the defendant claims that the trial court improperly (1) interpreted the allegedly unambiguous lan

LORNA G. SCHOFIELD, District Judge: Lead Plaintiffs Sean Hinshaw and Daniel Hovasse, individually and on behalf of all other persons similarly situated, bring this putative class action against Defendants Neurotrope, Inc. ("Neurotrope" or the "Company"), Susanne Wilke and Daniel Alkon (collectively, the "Individual Defendants"), alleging violations of § 10(b) and § 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the "Exchange Act"). D

IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE ) McWANE, INC., McWANE ) TECHNOLOGY, LLC, AND SYNAPSE WIRELESS, INC., ) ) Plaintiffs, ) C.A. No. 9488-VCP ) v. ) ) MONRO B. LANIER III, as Stockholder ) Repres

RULING ON POST-TRIAL MOTIONS JANET BOND ARTERTON, District Judge. Following a jury trial and a verdict in favor of Plaintiffs Margaret Fraser and Joseph Fraser, Defendants Wyeth, Inc. and Wyeth Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (collectively “Wyeth”) move [Doc. # 337] pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 50(b) for judgment as a matter of law on all of Plaintiffs’ claims and move [Doc. #339] pursuant to Federal

IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE IN RE BGC PARTNERS, INC. ) CONSOLIDATED DERIVATIVE LITIGATION ) C.A. No. 2018-0722-LWW MEMORANDUM OPINION Date Submitted: May 13, 2022 Date Decided: August 19, 2022 Christine M. Mackintosh, Michael D. Bell, and Vivek Upadhya, GRANT & EISENHOFER P.A., Wilmington, Delaware; Gregory V. Varallo and Andrew E. Blumberg, BERNSTEIN LITO

IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE HBK MASTER FUND L.P., and ) HBK MERGER STRATEGIES ) MASTER FUND L.P., ) ) Petitioners, ) ) v. ) C.A. No. 2020-0165-KSJM ) PIVOTAL SOFTWARE, INC., )

IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE HBK MASTER FUND L.P., and ) HBK MERGER STRATEGIES ) MASTER FUND L.P., ) ) Petitioners, ) ) v. ) C.A. No. 2020-0165-KSJM ) PIVOTAL SOFTWARE, INC., )

215 B.R. 651 (1997) In re BRIDGEPORT JAI ALAI, INC., Debtor. BRIDGEPORT JAI ALAI, INC., Movant, v. AUTOTOTE SYSTEMS, INC., Autotote Corporation, and Autotote Enterprises, Inc., Respondents. Bankruptcy No. 96-51183. United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Connecticut. December 29, 1997. *652 James G. Verrillo, Stephen M. Kindseth,

Opinion LAVER Y, J. The plaintiff, DeCarlo and Doll, Inc., appeals from the judgment of the trial court for the defendant, Terry M. Dilozir, in a breach of a contract action. On appeal, the plaintiff contends that the trial court improperly found the contract ambiguous and therefore determined that a subsequent letter between the parties was a contractual amendment. This determination by the trial c

*********************************************** The “officially released” date that appears near the be- ginning of each opinion is the date the opinion will be pub- lished in the Connecticut Law Journal or the date it was released as a slip opinion. The operative date for the be- ginning of all time periods for filing postopinion motions and petitions for certification is the “officially released” date appearing in the opinion. All opinions are subject to modification and technical corr

USCA4 Appeal: 24-1684 Doc: 69 Filed: 08/25/2025 Pg: 1 of 27 PUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 24-1684 LYNN FREEMAN, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. PROGRESSIVE DIRECT

*3 Opinion FLYNN, J. John R. DeMattia appeals from the judgments of the trial court rendered in favor of Patricia Mauro1 ordering the return to her of all sums that she paid to DeMattia in connection with a real estate contract.2 On appeal, DeMattia claims that the court improperly (1) found

449 F.Supp.2d 1 (2006) UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff, and Tobacco-Free Kids Action Fund, American Cancer Society, American Heart Association, American Lung Association, Americans for Nonsmokers' Rights, and National African American Tobacco Prevention Network, Intervenors, v. PHILIP MORRIS USA, INC., (f/k/a Philip Morris, Inc.), et al., Defendants. No. CIV.A. 99-2496(GK). United States Distri

NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY APPELLATE DIVISION DOCKET NO. A-3939-18 IN THE MATTER OF THE IMPLEMENTATION OF L. 2018, C. 16 REGARDING THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A ZERO EMISSION CERTIFICATE APPROVED FOR PUBLICATION PROGRAM FOR ELIGIBLE March 19, 2021 NUCLEAR POW

JAMES L. ROBART, United States District Judge INTRODUCTION Before the court is Defendant Eddie Bauer, LLC's ("Eddie Bauer") motion to dismiss (2d MTD (Dkt. # 40) ) Plaintiff Veridian Credit Union's ("Veridian") first amended putative class action complaint (FAC (Dkt. # 36) ).1 The court has considered Eddie Bauer's motion, Veridian's response (Resp. (Dkt. # 53) ), Eddie

IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE WINKLEVOSS CAPITAL FUND, ) LLC, TYLER WINKLEVOSS, and ) CAMERON WINKLEVOSS, ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) v. ) C.A. No. 2018-0398-NAC ) STEPHEN SHAW, THE ) WESTERMAN TRUST U/T/D

MEMORANDUM & ORDER WILLIAM H. PAULEY III, District Judge: In late 2010, the FBI executed coordinated raids on several well-known hedge funds in a highly touted investigation of insider trading. Plaintiff David Ganek’s hedge fund, Level Global Investors, was among them. These raids sent shock-waves through Wall Street: investment bankers and traders were indicted, and multi-billion dollar bu

Owens, J. At issue in this case is whether the Court of Appeals properly concluded that the Washington Department of Labor and Industries (the Department) had violated a statutory duty to promulgate a rule requiring mandatory blood testing for agricultural pesticide handlers. Although the Court of Appeals acknowledged that differing standards of review applied to the Department’s rule-

84 F.Supp.2d 9 (1999) UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff, v. MICROSOFT CORPORATION, Defendant. State of New York, ex rel. Attorney General Eliot Spitzer et al., Plaintiffs and Counterclaim-Defendants, v. Microsoft Corporation, Defendant and Counterclaim-Plaintiff. Nos. CIV. A. 98-1232(TPJ), CIV. A. 98-1233(TPJ). United States District Court, District of Columbia. N