HeyJaredRichard L. Renck
- Indexed articles, last 90 days
- 4
- Latest publication
- Aug 18, 2026
- Outlet visibility, for Mondaq
- Top 500K sites
- Earliest in this view
- Jul 23, 2026
Latest articles
Another “Minute About Minutes” (opens the original)
Read excerpt
On August 6, 2026, Delaware’s Court of Chancery issued two opinions providing additional context for important issues surrounding corporate minutes. The first, City of Pontiac Police and Fire Retirement Sys., et al. v. Dayforce, Inc., C.A. No. 2026-0073-LM, addressed corporate minutes in the context of an action by stockholders seeking to enforce their statutory rights to inspect the books and records of the corporation as provided in Section 220 of the DGCL. In that case, the Magistrate in Chan
Arbitrating Internal Affairs Disputes: Two New Chancery Opinions Chart The Path Under DGCL § 122(18) (opens the original)
Read excerpt
Two recent Delaware Court of Chancery opinions—Mayya v. Lee (C.A. No. 2023-0382-NAC, July 27, 2026) and The Special Committee of Iridium Industries, Inc. v. Sassouni (C.A. No. 2025-1488-NAC, Aug. 5, 2026)—offer critical guidance for transactional practitioners seeking to route internal corporate governance disputes to arbitration via stockholder agreements. These two opinions follow closely on the heels of an April 2026 opinion from the same court addressing these matters, which this blog discus
Precision In Drafting–Recitals Are Not Substantive Terms, And “Value” Must Mean What You Intend (opens the original)
Read excerpt
A recent Delaware Court of Chancery opinion, Feeney Brothers Excavation Trust v. Artera Services Holdco, LLC, C.A. No. 2025-0558-PAW (Del. Ch. July 31, 2026), offers a sharp reminder to transactional practitioners about the limits of recitals and the critical importance of defining consideration with precision–particularly where elements of that consideration may not have a static valuation. In Feeney Brothers, plaintiffs sold their business interests in exchange for cash and rollover equity. Wh
Court Of Chancery Provides First Interpretation Of DGCL Section 144(d)(2)’s Heightened Director Independence Standard (opens the original)
Read excerpt
On June 15, 2026, Vice Chancellor Will issued an opinion in Ayers v. Foley, et al. (C.A. No. 2025-0650-LWW) that marks the first judicial interpretation of the director independence provisions added to Section 144 of the Delaware General Corporation Law in 2025. For practitioners, the decision offers important guidance on how the Court of Chancery will apply the statute’s heightened presumption of disinterestedness when a board’s independence determinations are challenged—especially for director
Publishing over time
Last 90 days. Choose a month to open its work.
Recurring subjects
Named in the text we hold. One piece can cover several.
Audience
Top 500K sites
For Mondaq, the outlet · Measured Aug 1, 2026
Website popularity band, not a count of readers or article views.
About this data
Counts cover the work we have indexed. Tone needs enough text and a confident classification. Excerpts and episode notes are not full articles or transcripts.
Identity or attribution wrong? Suggest a correction.