Jaroslawicz v. M&T Bank Corporation et al
| David Jaroslawicz |
| M&T Bank Corporation, Hudson City Bancorp Inc., Robert G. Wilmers, Rene F. Jones, Mark J. Czarnecki, Brent D. Baird, Angela C. Bontempo, Robert T. Brady, Jefferson T. Cunningham, III, Gary N. Geisel, John D. Hawke, Jr., Patrick W.E. Hodgson, Richard G. King, Jorge G. Pereira, Melinda R. Rich, Robert E. Sadler, Jr., Herbert L. Washington, Denis J. Salamone, Michael W. Azzara, Victoria H. Bruni, Donald O. Quest, Joseph G. Sponholz, Cornelius E. Golding, William G. Bardel and Scott A. Belair |
| 1:2015cv00897 |
| October 7, 2015 |
| US District Court for the District of Delaware |
| Wilmington Office |
| XX US, Outside State |
| Richard G. Andrews |
| Securities/Commodities/Exchanges |
| 15 U.S.C. ยง 78 |
| Plaintiff |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
223
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER: Accordingly, the present Memorandum Opinion and Order shall substitute as the entire Order addressing Defendants' Motion to Exclude and Plaintiffs' Motion for Class Certification, and Court's August 28, 20 23 Memorandum Opinion and Order, D.I. 218 ; Jaroslawicz v. M&T Bank Corp., C.A. No. 15-00897-EJW, 2023 WL 5528723 (Aug. 28, 2023), is hereby VACATED. In accordance with the reasoning herein, Defendants' Motion to Exclude, D.I. 145 , is hereby DENIED, and Plaintiffs Motion for Class Certification, D.I. 136 , is hereby DENIED. Signed by Judge Evan J Wallach on 2/7/2024. (mpb)
|
|
Filing
221
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER: The Court hereby finds that its August 28, 2023 Opinion clearly erred as a matter of law by failing to rigorously analyze the competing evidence in order to resolve the genuine disputed of the Parties regarding the requi rements of Rule 23(b)(3). The Court retains jurisdiction over this matter, and hereby Orders under its inherent authority to reconsider its prior interlocutory orders that it will review and amend its August 28, 2023 Opinion consistent with Third Circuit precedent in Hydrogen Peroxide. (PLEASE SEE WHOLE MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER FOR FURTHER DETAILS) Signed by Judge Evan J Wallach on 11/1/2023. (apk)
|
|
Filing
218
MEMORANDUM OPNION AND ORDER: Defendants' Motion to Exclude is DENIED, and Plaintiffs' Motion for Class Certification is GRANTED IN PART as to satisfaction of the requirements of Rule 23(a) and (b)(3) for traditional shareholders of Hudson C ity, but Plaintiffs' Motion is DENIED IN PART with prejudice as to the inclusion of merger arbitrageurs in the class, as described by Defendants, and DENIED IN PART without prejudice as to Plaintiffs' proposed class definition and as to cer tification of class. The Court will approve a class definition and certify the class subsequent to a determination regarding an appropriate class definition that excludes merger arbitrageurs and satisfies the requirement of ascertainability of the cl ass based on objective criteria and a reliable and administratively feasible mechanism. It is further Ordered that the Parties shall meet and confer and notify the Court within fifteen days of the issuance of this Opinion of an appropriate definition of merger arbitrageurs to use in the class definition to exclude merger arbitrageurs from the Class. If the Parties cannot agree to such a definition, the Parties shall notify the Court and the Court will hold a telephonic conference to reach a dete rmination as to the definition. The Court reserves its discretion to further tailor the class definition and certify the Class after making the above determination, consistent with the analysis and reasoning herein regarding the requirements of Rule 23 (PLEASE SEE WHOLE MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER FOR FURTHER DETAILS). Signed by Judge Evan J Wallach on 8/28/2023. (apk)
|
|
Filing
84
MEMORANDUM OPINION regarding Motion to Dismiss (D.I. 75 ). Signed by Judge Richard G. Andrews on 10/27/2017. (nms)
|
|
Filing
82
MEMORANDUM ORDER directing further submissions regarding Motion to Dismiss (D.I. 75 ). Signed by Judge Richard G. Andrews on 10/18/2017. (nms)
|
|
Filing
70
MEMORANDUM ORDER: Defendants' Motion to Dismiss (D.I. 61 ) is GRANTED with leave to amend as to the Section 14(a) claims, GRANTED with prejudice as to the Section 20(a) claims, and GRANTED with leave to amend as to the state law fiduciary duty claims. Counts I and II are DISMISSED without prejudice. Count III is DISMISSED with prejudice. Count IV is DISMISSED without prejudice. Any amended complaint should be filed not later than twenty-one days from the date of this Memorandum Order. Signed by Judge Richard G. Andrews on 3/30/2017. (nms)
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Delaware District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
