The Annual Survey Working Group of the M&A Jurisprudence Subcommittee, Mergers and Acquisitions Committee, of the ABA Business Law Section reports annually on judicial decisions of significance to mergers and acquisitions (“M&A”) practitioners. The topics covered in the 2023 survey include contractual interpretation, fiduciary duties, and statutory constructs.
The path to a mootness fee is well-worn. A stockholder plaintiff sues alleging that a company’s disclosures or other decisions were inadequate or improper. The company responds by issuing disclosures or taking actions that moot the plaintiff’s claims. This, laudably, avoids the expense and distraction of litigation.
https://ma-litigation.sidley.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2022/08/sidleyLogo-e1643922598198.png00Charlotte K. Newellhttps://ma-litigation.sidley.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2022/08/sidleyLogo-e1643922598198.pngCharlotte K. Newell2023-08-30 09:31:392023-09-08 09:52:59Magellan Health: A New North Star for Mootness Fee Disputes May Reduce Payments to Plaintiff’s Counsel
In a recent decision, Vice Chancellor Will refused to award expectation damages based on a buyer’s “speculative” synergistic cash flow resulting from a merger. The opinion demonstrates the rigorous approach that the Delaware Court of Chancery takes to calculating damages related to M&A transactions even with strong evidence of fraud, and offers valuable insight to companies calculating damages from lost synergies in M&A transactions.
https://ma-litigation.sidley.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2022/08/sidleyLogo-e1643922598198.png00Robert S. Velevishttps://ma-litigation.sidley.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2022/08/sidleyLogo-e1643922598198.pngRobert S. Velevis2023-08-24 14:34:192023-09-08 09:53:44The Line Between Speculation and Expectation in Damages: Delaware Court of Chancery Weighs in on Damages for Fraud in M&A Transaction
Three Sidley partners come together to discuss various issues surrounding a decision to release earnings earlier than scheduled, including the legal, investor relations, and practical considerations that should be considered in making such a decision.
Artificial intelligence (AI) has the capacity to disrupt entire industries, with implications for corporate strategy and risk, stakeholder relationships, and compliance that require the attention of the board of directors.
https://ma-litigation.sidley.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2023/01/MN-18360_Updated-Enhanced-Scrutiny-Blog-imagery_833x606_25.jpg606833Holly J. Gregoryhttps://ma-litigation.sidley.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2022/08/sidleyLogo-e1643922598198.pngHolly J. Gregory2023-08-10 09:18:392024-02-06 12:47:11AI and the Role of the Board of Directors
A recent Delaware Court of Chancery decision offers an important lesson on the limits of court review of an arbitration award, particularly when parties forego a fully reasoned award. Even though Vice Chancellor Glasscock found that “[t]he arbitration proceeding and the resulting award [were] flawed,” the court refused to overturn the award that appeared to find a contractual nonparty jointly and severally liable for breaches of the representations and warranties in a purchase agreement. The risk parties sometimes take when they contract for arbitration, the court found, is “receiving an arbitral decision that is questionable under the law and facts, but that is nonetheless—not coming within the narrow window of judicial oversight—not reviewable.”
https://ma-litigation.sidley.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2022/08/sidleyLogo-e1643922598198.png00Ian M. Rosshttps://ma-litigation.sidley.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2022/08/sidleyLogo-e1643922598198.pngIan M. Ross2023-08-08 09:21:352023-09-08 09:55:46Beware “Lite” Reasoning: Delaware Vice Chancellor Refuses to Disturb Arbitration Ruling Despite Concerns About Flawed Reasoning and Outcome
We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue to use this site we will assume that you are happy with it.Ok
Five Essential D&O Insurance Questions
Recent cases highlight the increased risk of personal liability for directors. Is your company doing enough to protect the board?
John M. Skakun III
Chicago
jskakun@sidley.com
Annual Survey of Judicial Developments Pertaining to Mergers and Acquisitions
The Annual Survey Working Group of the M&A Jurisprudence Subcommittee, Mergers and Acquisitions Committee, of the ABA Business Law Section reports annually on judicial decisions of significance to mergers and acquisitions (“M&A”) practitioners. The topics covered in the 2023 survey include contractual interpretation, fiduciary duties, and statutory constructs.
(more…)
Enhanced Scrutiny Contributors
delawarelit@sidley.com
Magellan Health: A New North Star for Mootness Fee Disputes May Reduce Payments to Plaintiff’s Counsel
The path to a mootness fee is well-worn. A stockholder plaintiff sues alleging that a company’s disclosures or other decisions were inadequate or improper. The company responds by issuing disclosures or taking actions that moot the plaintiff’s claims. This, laudably, avoids the expense and distraction of litigation.
(more…)
Charlotte K. Newell
New York
cnewell@sidley.com
The Line Between Speculation and Expectation in Damages: Delaware Court of Chancery Weighs in on Damages for Fraud in M&A Transaction
In a recent decision, Vice Chancellor Will refused to award expectation damages based on a buyer’s “speculative” synergistic cash flow resulting from a merger. The opinion demonstrates the rigorous approach that the Delaware Court of Chancery takes to calculating damages related to M&A transactions even with strong evidence of fraud, and offers valuable insight to companies calculating damages from lost synergies in M&A transactions.
(more…)
Robert S. Velevis
Dallas
rvelevis@sidley.com
Phillip Shaverdian
Dallas
pshaverdian@sidley.com
Timely Takes Podcast: Earnings Pre-Releases
Three Sidley partners come together to discuss various issues surrounding a decision to release earnings earlier than scheduled, including the legal, investor relations, and practical considerations that should be considered in making such a decision.
(more…)
Beth E. Berg
Chicago
bberg@sidley.com
Paul L. Choi
Chicago
pchoi@sidley.com
Jim Ducayet
Chicago
jducayet@sidley.com
AI and the Role of the Board of Directors
(more…)
Holly J. Gregory
New York
holly.gregory@sidley.com
Beware “Lite” Reasoning: Delaware Vice Chancellor Refuses to Disturb Arbitration Ruling Despite Concerns About Flawed Reasoning and Outcome
A recent Delaware Court of Chancery decision offers an important lesson on the limits of court review of an arbitration award, particularly when parties forego a fully reasoned award. Even though Vice Chancellor Glasscock found that “[t]he arbitration proceeding and the resulting award [were] flawed,” the court refused to overturn the award that appeared to find a contractual nonparty jointly and severally liable for breaches of the representations and warranties in a purchase agreement. The risk parties sometimes take when they contract for arbitration, the court found, is “receiving an arbitral decision that is questionable under the law and facts, but that is nonetheless—not coming within the narrow window of judicial oversight—not reviewable.”
(more…)
Ian M. Ross
Miami
iross@sidley.com
Categories
Archives
Meet the Team
Andrew W. Stern
astern@sidley.com
Charlotte K. Newell
cnewell@sidley.com
Elizabeth Y. Austin
laustin@sidley.com
Jaime A. Bartlett
jbartlett@sidley.com
Jim Ducayet
jducayet@sidley.com
Yolanda C. Garcia
ygarcia@sidley.com
James Heyworth
jheyworth@sidley.com
Alex J. Kaplan
ajkaplan@sidley.com
Jodi E. Lopez
jlopez@sidley.com
Jon Muenz
jmuenz@sidley.com
Ian M. Ross
iross@sidley.com
Hille R. Sheppard
hsheppard@sidley.com
Heather Benzmiller Sultanian
hsultanian@sidley.com
Robert S. Velevis
rvelevis@sidley.com
Robin E. Wechkin
rwechkin@sidley.com