Opinion
No. 281, 2015
12-11-2015
Morris Fuchs, et al., Plaintiffs Below–Appellants, v. Wren Holdings, LLC, Javva Partners, LLC, Cameron Family Partnership, L.P., Catalyst Investors, L.P., Christopher Shipman, Andrew T. Dwyer, Dort A. Cameron, III, Howard Katz, and Troy Snyder, Defendants Below–Appellees.
ORDER
Leo E. Strine, Jr., Chief Justice
This 11th day of December 2015, upon consideration of the parties' briefs, the record below, and oral argument, it appears to the Court that:
In this case, the Court of Chancery had to apply a challenging body of law in a hotly contested matter. No party has asked us to overturn any prior decision; they solely challenge the Court of Chancery's determinations of law under existing precedent, its determinations of fact, and its exercise of remedial discretion. After careful review, we conclude that the Court of Chancery made no error of law, made no determination of fact not supported by the record, and committed no abuse of discretion.
For example, the Court of Chancery addressed three times whether the plaintiffs' central claim was direct or derivative under Gentile v. Rossette, 906 A.2d 91 (Del. 2006).
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the September 4, 2014 judgment of the Court of Chancery is AFFIRMED.
In re Nine Sys. Corp. S'holders Litig., 2014 WL 4383127 (Del. Ch. Sept. 4, 2014).