“I meant what I said, and I said what I meant.” Delaware high court holds that stock purchase agreement indemnification fraud carveout was limited to deliberate fraud, not recklessness. M&A Stories August 02, 2021 Introduction: In a recent M&A (Mergers…
Blog Archives
DELAWARE SUPREME COURT REVERSES $82 MILLION FRAUD AWARD IN M&A CASE
Posted in deliberate fraud carveout, exclusive remedy, fraud carveout Tagged with: Delaware High Court, Delaware Supreme Court, Due Diligence Concerns, Express Scripts v. Bracket Holdings, Fraud Carveout, Legal Disputes, M&A Fraud, Pharmaceutical Research and Development, Recklessness Not “Deliberate Fraud”, Reversal of Fraud Award, stock purchase agreement
Buyer’s Right to Sue Sellers for $9 Million in Pre and Post-Sales Tax Liabilities in M&A Deal
Explore a case study where a buyer’s right to sue sellers for $9 million in pre and post-sales tax liabilities was examined in an M&A deal. Learn about the legal arguments, court decisions, and the implications for similar situations. July…
Posted in fraud carveout, post-closing sales tax, pre-closing sales tax, sales tax risk Tagged with: buyer's right to sue sellers, Court decision, escrow funds, fraud exception, indemnification, Legal dispute, M&A deal, post-closing period, sales tax liabilities, tax audit, tax representations, warranty breach
Delaware Court Allows Buyer’s Claims Against Seller for Breach and Fraud in Business Acquisition
Explore a significant M&A legal case where a Delaware court permitted a buyer to pursue claims against a seller for breach and fraud in a business acquisition. Get insights into the buyer’s legal battle and the implications of acquisition agreement…
Posted in damages, exclusive remedy, fraud carveout, indemnification cap Tagged with: acquisition agreement terms, Buyer's Claims, Delaware Court, Firmenich Incorporated v. Natural Flavors, fraud in business acquisition, Inc., industry compliance, Legal dispute, M&A legal case, M&A litigation, organic certificates, organic product manufacturing, seller breach
Court Rules on $12 Million M&A Termination Fee
Explore the court’s decision on a $12 million M&A termination fee in the case of Genuine Parts Company v. Essendant Inc. Learn valuable insights for M&A deals and fiduciary out clauses. November 5, 2019 Introduction: In M&A deals, sellers often…
Posted in exclusive remedy, fraud carveout, termination of M&A agreement, termination or breakup fee, willful breach carveout Tagged with: Court of Chancery of Delaware, Essendant Inc., Exclusive remedy provision, Fiduciary oatiout clause, Genuine Parts Company, M&A legal case, M&A termination fee, merger agreement, non-solicitation provision
How a Fraud Carve-Out Protected a Buyer’s Employee Non-Solicitation Claim in an M&A Deal
Explore a case study where a fraud carve-out provision played a crucial role in protecting a buyer’s interests in an M&A deal. Learn about the legal intricacies surrounding employee non-solicitation claims and exclusive remedy provisions. October 19, 2019 Introduction: Many…
Posted in boilerplate provisions, fraud carveout, hiring seller's employees, nonsolicitation of employees and customers Tagged with: asset purchase agreement, Breach of Covenant, Business acquisition, case reference, Employee Non-solicitation, exclusive remedy, fraud carve out, indemnification, Legal dispute, M&A, merger and acquisition, nonsolicitation covenant, Sacramento Federal Court, Trampoline Park
Buyer’s Fraud Claim Survives in M&A Case
Explore a recent Delaware M&A case where a buyer successfully navigated legal obstacles, including fraud claims, in an asset purchase agreement. Learn about the court’s ruling and the significance of fraud carve-out provisions in M&A transactions. August 7, 2019 M&A…
Posted in bootstrapping doctrine, exclusive remedy, fraud carveout, fraud in business sale, non-reliance clause Tagged with: 3M Company v. Neology, asset purchase agreement, bootstrapping doctrine, Breach of contract, Buyer's fraud claim, contractual representations, Court ruling in M&A case, Delaware M&A case, Exclusive remedies, Fraud carve-out provision, Fraudulent concealment, Fraudulent inducement, Inc. case, Indemnification caps, Legal hurdles in M&A, M&A legal blog, Overheating issue, Product development issues, Rescissory damages, Seller's misrepresentations, survival periods
M&A Integration Provision and Exclusive Remedy Clause: How They Impact Seller Claims
Explore the crucial role of the APA Integration Provision and Exclusive Remedy Clause in a recent M&A case involving a Denver-based seller and a Houston-based buyer. Discover key allegations, the seller’s claim, the court’s decision, and the legal obstacles faced…
Posted in earn out, economic loss doctrine, exclusive remedy, integration clause Tagged with: Asset purchase agreement (APA), Business Closure, Case Reference: In Re Allonhill, Colorado Choice of Law, Contractual Remedies, Court's Decision, Denver-Based Seller, Earnout Payments, economic loss rule, Exclusive Remedy Clause, Houston-Based Buyer, integration clause, legal challenges in M&A, Legal Provisions in M&A, LLC, M&A Integration Provision, M&A legal blog, Material Misrepresentations, Negligent Misrepresentation, Seller Claims, Tort Liability
Boilerplate provision (fraud carve-out) saves the buyer’s fraud lawsuit against the seller of a business
The seller owned and operated a food tray business that sold rigid trays, foam trays, and absorbent pads to food handlers and processors. In the summer of 2014, the seller sought to sell its North American foam tray and pads…
Posted in exclusive remedy, fraud carveout
Recent Comments