Search for: "State v. Laster"
Results 101 - 120
of 225
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
2 Oct 2024, 9:05 pm
Under Section 102(a)(3), Laster stated that a “limited purpose clause effectively modifies the orientation of the directors’ fiduciary duties. [read post]
9 Jul 2010, 11:56 am
Most recently, in Roffe v. [read post]
Delaware Supreme Court Reverses Chancery Judgment, Awards Wind Farm Investor $126 million in Damages
5 May 2019, 11:54 am
In the recent Delaware Supreme Court decision of Leaf Invenergy Co. v. [read post]
9 Nov 2018, 6:59 am
In the recent Delaware Supreme Court decision of CompoSecure LLC v. [read post]
10 Jun 2010, 2:33 pm
By Ryan McCoy Recently, in AT&T Mobility LLC v. [read post]
30 Jan 2008, 5:18 am
Financial Advisor Disclosure: Globis Partners v. [read post]
28 Apr 2020, 5:42 pm
Fund v. [read post]
11 Mar 2010, 2:44 pm
” Pfeiffer v. [read post]
26 Feb 2018, 7:25 am
Aruba Networks, Inc., February 15, 2018, Laster, J.). [read post]
6 Nov 2017, 2:26 pm
Schulman, Inc. v. [read post]
9 Nov 2007, 6:00 am
(C.D.Cal. 2005) 426 F.Supp.2d 1061, 1069; Laster v. [read post]
22 May 2017, 3:28 am
VC Laster’s Transcript Ruling in Gerlanc v Beatrice A recent transcript ruling by Vice Chancellor Travis Laster of the Delaware Court of Chancery in Gerlanc v Beatrice, CA No. 2017-0211-JTL (Mar. 23, 2017), reaches the opposite result on similar facts due to key differences in Delaware’s LLC Act. [read post]
22 May 2017, 3:28 am
VC Laster’s Transcript Ruling in Gerlanc v Beatrice A recent transcript ruling by Vice Chancellor Travis Laster of the Delaware Court of Chancery in Gerlanc v Beatrice, CA No. 2017-0211-JTL (Mar. 23, 2017), reaches the opposite result on similar facts due to key differences in Delaware’s LLC Act. [read post]
2 Jun 2017, 2:00 pm
In Buch v. [read post]
14 Jun 2016, 1:33 pm
” Indeed, Justice Valihura noted that Vice Chancellor Laster, in an immediate post-trial reaction, stated that “the credibility of the people on the [B]oard” was “very, very strong. [read post]
28 Apr 2011, 5:03 am
The Ninth Circuit affirmed, holding that “the Discover Bank rule was not preempted by the FAA because that rule was simply a ‘refinement of the unconscionability analysis applicable to contracts generally in California.’” Id., at 3-4 (citing Laster v. [read post]
26 Feb 2009, 10:26 am
Supreme Court (in T-Mobile v. [read post]
20 Dec 2017, 7:50 am
Carl is admitted in the State of Delaware and regularly practices before the Delaware Court of Chancery, with an emphasis on shareholder disputes. [read post]
19 Jan 2011, 1:41 pm
Vice Chancellor Laster’s bench ruling on a discovery dispute in Roffe v. [read post]
19 Jan 2011, 1:42 pm
Vice Chancellor Laster’s bench ruling on a discovery dispute in Roffe v. [read post]
