April 13, 2009
The Hunstman Case
A panel in Vegas discussed the Delaware Chancery case on Apollo v Huntsman. Comments by Chancellor Lamb, if reported properly (and big it), reveal that a willingness to negotiate a settlement could affect the outcome of busted deal cases. Why? It should not affect the merits and Judges should do what they are paid to do -- decide cases on the merits when parties cannot agree. A Judge that does not want to decide cases should not be a judge.
April 13, 2009 | Permalink
TrackBack URL for this entry:
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference The Hunstman Case:
That's not exactly what was said. The issue was that Hexion never reached out to discuss its concern with Huntsman that Huntsman had suffered an MAE. The court found that the failure to do so was inconsistent with Hexion's contractual covenant to use its reasonable best efforts to consummate the transaction. Thus, the MAE claim was mere pretext for Hexion's change of heart.
Also, the panel was in New Orleans.
Keep up the great blogging.
Posted by: AnonCorpLawyer | Apr 14, 2009 6:10:05 AM
So which description is accurate. Nevertheless keep of the great Blog.
Business Communication Services
Posted by: AG | Apr 23, 2009 5:59:06 AM