We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.
If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.

Search results

Order by: most recent most popular relevance



Results: 1-10 of 230

Fee advancement considerations arise from recent Delaware and Third Circuit decisions
  • Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP
  • USA
  • July 20 2015

Recent decisions by the US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit and the Delaware Court of Chancery have raised important issues regarding fee


Court of Appeals for Third Circuit overturns district court ruling regarding exclusion of shareholder proposal from proxy statement
  • Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP
  • USA
  • July 17 2015

On July 6, the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit issued an opinion overturning the November 2014 ruling of the United States


Seventh Circuit holds under Indiana law, company was allowed to vote its own shares
  • Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP
  • USA
  • July 10 2015

The United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit recently affirmed a district court decision holding that under Indiana law, an Indiana


Delaware amends its corporate law to prohibit fee-shifting, approve exclusive forum provisions and Facilitate At-The-Market Offerings
  • Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP
  • USA
  • June 26 2015

On June 24, Delaware's Governor signed legislation approving amendments to the Delaware General Corporation Law (DGCL). While annual amendments to


Delaware Supreme Court holds that plaintiffs must specifically plead non-exculpated claims against disinterested directors in transaction under entire fairness review to survive motion to dismiss
  • Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP
  • USA
  • May 29 2015

In In re Cornerstone Therapeutics Inc. Stockholder LitigationLeal v. Meeks, the Delaware Supreme Court reversed decisions of the Delaware Chancery


Ninth Circuit honors Canadian business law’s exclusive remedy provision
  • Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP
  • USA
  • May 1 2015

The US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit recently affirmed dismissal of a counterclaim for breach of fiduciary duty brought under Section 242 of


Delaware Court of Chancery restricts board’s ability to subject former shareholders to new bylaws
  • Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP
  • USA
  • March 20 2015

The Delaware Court of Chancery recently held, in a case of first impression, that a non-reciprocal fee-shifting bylaw cannot be applied to a claim


Delaware proposal banning fee-shifting and permitting exclusive forum provisions
  • Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP
  • USA
  • March 20 2015

Following the unexpected May 2014 decision of the Delaware Supreme Court in ATP Tour Inc. v. Deutscher Tennis Bund, 91 A.3d 554 (Del. 2014


Delaware Chancery Court addresses proper purpose for inspection demand
  • Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP
  • USA
  • March 13 2015

The Delaware Court of Chancery recently held that a shareholder was not entitled to inspect records concerning alleged violations of the Foreign


Delaware court rules that beneficial stockholder may seek appraisal in its own name
  • Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP
  • USA
  • January 16 2015

On January 5, the Delaware Court of Chancery ruled that a beneficial stockholder has standing to bring an action for appraisal in its own name when