The Delaware Court of Chancery addressed in a recent opinion the nuances of imposing personal jurisdiction (in a second ruling on the issue in as many days), in connection with someone who served as a de facto manager of an LLC.  In Metro Storage International LLC v. Harron, C.A. No. 2018-0937-JTL (Del. Ch. July 19, 2019), the court provided what can be fairly described as a definitive and comprehensive analysis, in the nature of a treatise,…

A recent Delaware Court of Chancery decision provides an excellent analysis of the requirements for imposing personal jurisdiction based on the Delaware Long Arm Statute, and also addresses the fiduciary duty of disclosure in a thorough manner worthy of careful reading.  In Clark v. Davenport, C.A. No. 2017-0839-JTL (Del. Ch. July 18, 2019), the court provided a noteworthy explanation of the important nuances that need to be understood when personal jurisdiction is contested.  This is…

A recent Delaware Court of Chancery case should win a “candor award” for acknowledging that despite the arguments of both sides regarding the alleged intent of parties in the agreement at issue, the court found that notwithstanding multiple re-readings of both the agreement involved, and the arguments of the parties in their briefs, the court could not quite understand the intent of the parties to the contract. Therefore, the court determined that extrinsic evidence was…

For those interested in an interpretation of § 174 of the Delaware General Corporation Law, and under what circumstances directors may be personally liable in connection with issuing dividends, as well as the statute of limitations for claims that § 174 was violated, it remains necessary to read the recent Court of Chancery decision in JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. v. Ballard, C.A. No. 2018-0274-AGB (Del. Ch. July 11, 2019). This decision also addresses the…

The recent Delaware Chancery Court opinion in Ephrat v. medCPU, Inc., C.A. No. 2018-0052-MTZ (Del. Ch. June 26, 2019), remains noteworthy for two reasons, notwithstanding the large number of advancement decisions interpreting DGCL Section 145 appearing on these pages over the last 14 years: (1)        It provides an anthology of prior Delaware decisions granting advancement to former directors or officers to defend claims regarding the use of confidential information acquired in their prior corporate capacity;…

Adding to the multitude of Delaware decisions featured on these pages involving the right of corporate directors and officers to advancement of their fees incurred to defend claims against them, pursuant to DGCL Section 145, or by agreement, we offer highlights of Sider v. Hertz Global Holdings, C.A. No. 2019-0237-KSJM, Order (Del. Ch. June 17, 2019), a recent Delaware Court of Chancery ruling. Our highlights appear in the form of an article published in the current …

A recent Delaware Court of Chancery decision interpreted an advance notice bylaw in a manner that disapproves of the attempt by the company to require onerous and extensive questions to be completed and returned within a five-day period before the proposed nominations to the board would be considered. The decision in Saba Capital Master v. Blacksock Credit Allocation Income Trust, C.A. No. 2019-0416-MTZ (Del. Ch. June 27, 2019), also includes useful nuggets of legal principles…