A “sandbagging” provision, sometimes referred to as a “pro-sandbagging” provision,) in an M&A agreement such as an—asset purchase agreement, stock purchase agreement, or merger agreement—states that a buyer's remedies against...more
Goulston & Storrs M&A attorney Dan Avery is a nationally recognized expert on M&A deal point trends. In partnership with Bloomberg Law, Dan has developed a series of 25 articles looking at these trends, on a topic-by-topic...more
Overview - The year 2022 started strong but proved to be a mixed year for M&A in what could be described as a return to earth after the record-setting year that was 2021. The U.S. M&A market alone exceeded $2 trillion in...more
Chancery Court Provides Additional Guidance on Disclosure Requirements for Corwin Analysis - One of the most significant decisions of the Delaware Chancery Court in the last 15 years was the court’s ruling in Corwin v....more
Image a home buyer finally finds their dream house. There’s just one problem. During their home inspection, they discover the foundation is cracked. But they buy the house anyway, fully aware of the issues with the...more
In the 19th century, “ruffians roamed the streets” and robbed “unsuspecting victims” using a tactic knowing as “sandbagging”: They wielded “ostensibly harmless socks” that were in fact “filled with sand and used as weapons.” ...more
Market Trends: What You Need to Know - “Sandbagging” concepts are often the subject of intense negotiation in M&A transactions. Inclusion of pro-sandbagging clauses within M&A purchase agreements has been on the decline,...more
In an opinion of significance to M&A Practitioners, the Delaware Court of Chancery recently made it clear that Delaware law allows a buyer in an acquisition to “sandbag” a seller if the acquisition agreement allows for...more
Delaware Clarifies “Pro-Sandbagging” Stance by Mark Tarallo and Mary Moran In almost every M&A transaction, the parties spend some time discussing (if not heavily negotiating) the right of the buyer to bring claims against...more
In a March 9, 2022, opinion, the Delaware Chancery Court examined a seller’s argument that the buyer in an asset purchase agreement was prohibited from asserting claims for contractual breach of representations in the...more
On March 9, 2022, the Delaware Court of Chancery issued a post-trial decision in Arwood v. AW Site Services, LLC, subsequently amended on March 24, 2022. The plaintiff, John Arwood, had spent decades building a waste...more
While M&A practitioners have long taken the view that Delaware is a “pro-sandbagging” state, a recent case in the Delaware Court of Chancery has added concrete authority to that position. In Arwood v. AW Site Services (March...more
The ABA Private Target Mergers & Acquisitions Deal Points Study is published on a bi-annual basis. The 2021 Deal Points Study (the “Study”) analyzed 123 publicly available purchase agreements executed and closed in 2020 and...more
A recent post-trial decision from the Delaware Court of Chancery has become the latest authority in the debate over whether Delaware is or is not a “pro-sandbagging” jurisdiction. In Arwood v. AW Site Services, Vice...more
It’s a situation that, at least theoretically, could happen many times every business day, all across the country, given how often businesses choose to have Delaware law apply to their contracts. A party (the seller or...more
A recent decision out of the Delaware Court of Chancery in John D. Arwood et al. v. AW Site Services, LLC, sheds significant light on whether a party to a contract governed by Delaware law may “sandbag” its counter party: as...more
The American Bar Association (ABA) 2020 – 2021 Private Target Mergers & Acquisitions Deal Points Study[1] analyzed publicly available acquisition agreements for 123 transactions executed and/or completed in 2020 and the first...more
Market Trends: - What You Need to Know As shown in the American Bar Association's Private Target Mergers and Acquisitions Deal Point Studies... Originally Published by Bloomberg Law - March 2021....more
A great deal has been written about the M&A wars, including our prior alerts regarding the issues that arise when a buyer attempts to terminate a deal as a result of a seller material adverse effect (MAE) or the inability of...more
There is perhaps no more consistently vexing problem for transactional attorneys on opposite sides than figuring out a fair contractual resolution for “sandbagging” issues....more
On October 1, in Akorn v. Fresenius Kabi, the Delaware Court of Chancery for the first time found that a material adverse effect — or MAE — had occurred in a merger transaction, which, combined with other breaches of the...more
Several weeks ago, we reviewed some of the newer Commercial Division Rules and reported on a couple recent decisions from Justice Shirley Werner Korneich of the Manhattan Commercial Division applying one of those Rules, Rule...more
Many of us have unfortunately experienced the perils and pitfalls that follow when imprecise terms and definitions appear in deal documents. The risks of imprecision are especially acute in the area of indemnities,...more
Agenda - Letters of Intent - Best Efforts - Indemnification - Sandbagging - Non-Reliance - Fiduciary Duties - Letters of Intent: • Buyer may seek letter of intent that is generally not binding on either party...more