Buckley v. Peak6 Investments, LP

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that issuer’s obligation under Section 8-401 were not triggered until Rule 144 opinion letter was provided to issuer’s transfer agent
• equitable fraud claim dismissed because leave to amend to add facts regarding a fiduciary relationship was denied
• the issuer was not obligated to respond to a shareholder's emails before the shareholders actually requested legend removal backed by a Rule 144 opinion as required by the restrictive legend in that case
• the issuer was not liable to the stockholder under the UCC where, after providing contact information for the issuer's attorney, it did not answer follow-up emails asking about specific procedures; the issuer did timely provide an opinion from corporate counsel
• Delaware § 8-401 displaces negligence claims
• Delaware § 8-401 displaces negligence claims

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).