Remove firms signature-litigation-llp
article thumbnail

Skadden Discusses Final SEC Rules on SPACs and De-SPACs

Reynolds Holding

Making the safe harbor for forward-looking statements under the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act (PSLRA) unavailable for SPACs. This post comes to us from Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP. Biran V.

Finance 45
article thumbnail

Federal Courts Wade Into Business Divorce: Recent Decisions of Interest

Farrel Fritz

Our federal courts by and large are not hospitable to business divorce litigation. Following are two recent federal court decisions of interest featuring claims among co-owners of closely-held firms. Disputed Expulsion of Law Firm Partner Raises Jurisdictional Issue. Cyrulnik moved to dismiss the S.D.N.Y. District Judge John G.

Finance 52
Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

article thumbnail

Skadden Discusses the Impact of Banking System Turmoil

Reynolds Holding

The runs on Silicon Valley Bank (SVB) and Signature Bank in March 2023 created a “very high” risk of contagion in the U.S. Some large private equity firms have said publicly that they are interested in providing capital to regional banks by buying loan assets. This post comes to us from Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP.

Banking 40
article thumbnail

At-Will Employment Agreement Plus Mandatory Redemption Clause Leaves Minority Shareholder-Employees Out in the Cold

Farrel Fritz

After years of middling success, MiniCorp is on the verge of making it big: a closing competitor and well-timed celebrity endorsement are poised to send sales of its signature product through the roof. Ultimately, several of the Firm’s partners—including Laurilliard, but not Pastore—received invitations to join WHO’s partnership.

article thumbnail

Gibson Dunn Discusses Shareholder Proposal Developments for the 2022 Proxy Season

Reynolds Holding

Despite concerns voiced from some shareholder proponents and other stakeholders (including ongoing litigation over the new rules), [5] the new rules do not appear to have had an appreciable effect on proponent eligibility or to have resulted in a significant increase in proposals eligible for procedural or substantive exclusion. See S.J.Res.16,

Equity 98