The Delaware Court of Chancery did not abuse its discretion when it dismissed an amended complaint because of two years of inactivity, the state Supreme Court has ruled.
A panel composed of Justices Carolyn Berger, Jack B. Jacobs and Henry duPont Ridgely issued the opinion March 16. In the ruling, the high court affirmed Chancellor Leo E. Strine Jr.’s August 2011 decision to dismissSolow v. Aspect Resources LLC . The case, a limited liability dispute, was vacated under Court of Chancery Rule 41(e), which grants the court the authority to dismiss cases for lack of activity.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
