In the recent decision of Jagodzinksi v. Silicon Valley Innovation Company, LLC, C.A. No. 7378-VCP (Del. Ch. Aug. 7, 2015), the Court of Chancery ruled on plaintiff’s motion to terminate the receiver, or in the alternative to lower the receiver’s compensation. This opinion is significant in that it addresses the standard considered by the Court
Receivership
Andrikopoulos Decision Adopted – Advancement Claims Not Afforded Priority Status in Receivership Proceeding
By Carl Neff on
Very recently, we wrote on the Andrikopoulos decision of Vice Chancellor Parsons (Andrikopolous v. Silicon Valley Innovation Company, LLC, C.A. No. 9899-VCP (Del. Ch. July 30, 2015), which held that, in a matter of first impression under Delaware law, claims for advancement by directors or officers against a company in receivership should…
Advancement Claim in Receivership Addressed
By Carl Neff on
In the recent decision of Andrikopolous v. Silicon Valley Innovation Company, LLC, C.A. No. 9899-VCP (Del. Ch. July 30, 2015), Vice Chancellor Parsons addressed the novel issue under Delaware law as to what priority level advancement claims are afforded in a receivership action.
This case is an important read for any director or officer…
Custodian Appointment on Interim Basis under Section 226 of the DGCL Denied
By Carl Neff on
Posted in Case Summaries, Receivership
We have previously discussed the standard for the appointment of a custodian to a deadlocked corporation under Section 226 of the Delaware General Corporation Law (“DGCL”). What standard is applied by the Court to consider whether to appoint a custodian on an interim basis to a corporation before a trial on the merits?
The recent…