In Virtus Capital v. Eastman Chemical, C.A. No. 9808-VCL (Del. Ch. Feb. 11, 2015), the Delaware Court of Chancery denied a motion to dismiss a complaint for lack of personal jurisdiction in a suit related to the 2011 sale of Sterling Chemicals Inc. to Eastman Chemical Co. that was allegedly orchestrated by Sterling’s controlling stockholder, Martin…

The Third Circuit Court of Appeals decided recently that a debtor does not need to actually possess property recovered under Section 550 for such property to constitute property of the debtor’s estate under Section 541(a)(3). See In re Allen, No. 13-3543 (3d Cir. Sept. 26, 2014). In Allen, the debtor commenced an adversary proceeding in the…

In Orckit Communications Ltd. v. Networks³ Inc. et al., the Delaware Court of Chancery granted defendant Networks³'s motion to dismiss a claim that it had wrongfully terminated an agreement to purchase patents from plaintiff Orckit.

In recent months, Delaware courts have addressed a number of issues important to Delaware corporations and their advisors.

In two opinions issued the same day, the Delaware Court of Chancery addressed standing requirements under Delaware's appraisal statute, Section 262 of the General Corporation Law of the State of Delaware.

In In re Comverge, Inc. Shareholders Litigation, the Delaware Court of Chancery granted in part the defendants' motion to dismiss a post-closing stockholder challenge to the acquisition of Comverge, Inc. by H.I.G. Capital, L.L.C., which acquisition the Court had previously declined to enjoin.

In four opinions issued within three months of one another, four different members of the Delaware Court of Chancery have considered, at the motion to dismiss procedural stage, whether allegations in a complaint were sufficient to establish that a minority stockholder constituted a controlling stockholder under Delaware law.

In Quadrant Structured Products Company, Ltd. v. Vertin, the Delaware Court of Chancery held that the contemporaneous ownership requirement of Section 327 of the General Corporation Law of the State of Delaware does not apply to corporate creditors for purposes of determining whether a creditor has standing to bring derivative claims against the board of directors of an insolvent corporation. 

In Cooper Tire & Rubber Company v. Apollo (Mauritius) Holdings Pvt. Ltd, the Delaware Court of Chancery found that Cooper Tire & Rubber Company had not satisfied all of the conditions to closing its merger with Apollo (Mauritius) Holdings Pvt. Ltd as of the trial date, and thus was likely barred from seeking a $112 million reverse termination fee under the merger agreement.

In Cigna Health & Life Insurance Company v. Audax Health Solutions, Inc., the Delaware Court of Chancery found invalid features of a private company merger agreement that required stockholders, as a condition to receiving their merger consideration, to submit a letter of transmittal agreeing to provide a release of all claims against the acquirer and that further required stockholders to indemnify, for an indefinite period of time, the acquirer for claims arising from the seller's breach of representations and warranties.