The court denies defendants’ motion to dismiss claims arising from a closed-end fund’s collapse and subsequent unfair merger.

The Delaware Chancery Court rejected an interlocutory appeal of the Court’s prior ruling denying defendants’ motion to dismiss, permitting discovery to proceed in the case.

A shareholder of VPC Impact Acquisition Holdings II (ticker: VPCB), a SPAC launched by Victory Park Capital, has filed suit against the SPAC’s sponsor and other insiders after the SPAC announced […]

Matt Levine writes about the key issue raised by three new SPAC cases filed by Morris Kandinov LLP: “Who gets the cash: the public shareholders, or the sponsors?”

The amended complaint in the Infinity Q case includes further details regarding the flawed and deficient oversight of the Fund’s valuation of securities, which resulted in manipulation and inflation of the fund’s reported assets by hundreds of millions of dollars.

Morris Kandinov LLP has filed a case on behalf of Lightning eMotors, Inc. (previously known as GigCapital 3, Inc.), which entered the public markets through a SPAC transaction based on misrepresentations regarding its business prospects.

Morris Kandinov along with two other firms will handle litigation involving a significant decline in merger value caused by Anaplan’s management.

Morris Kandinov represents a group of investors who oppose the inadequate proposed Infinity Q settlement in a New York class action.

Morris Kandinov LLP represents investors in an action in New York seeking equitable distribution of a SPAC break-up fee.

Partner Aaron Morris proposes in a comment letter to the SEC that the new rules governing service provider oversight should require contracts with providers to clearly delineate when a provider is entitled to indemnification and expense advancements.