Opinion
Civil Action No. 9567-VCG
01-25-2016
Re: Brad D. Greenspan v. News Corporation, et al.
Brad Greenspan 2995 Woodside Road, Suite 400 Woodside, CA 94062 Gregory V. Varallo, Esquire Kevin M. Gallagher, Esquire Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A. One Rodney Square 920 North King Street Wilmington, DE 19801 Kevin M. Coen, Esquire Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LP 1201 North Market Street Wilmington, DE 19801 Kathaleen St. J. McCormick, Esquire Daniel M. Kirshenbaum, Esquire Young, Conaway, Stargatt & Taylor 100 North King Street Wilmington, DE 19899 A. Thompson Bayliss, Esquire Abrams & Bayliss LLP 20 Montchanin Road, Suite 200 Wilmington, DE 19807 Daniel B. Rath, Esquire Rebecca L. Butcher, Esquire Tyler O'Connell, Esquire Landis Rath & Cobb LLP 919 North Market Street Wilmington, DE 19801
Date Submitted: January 25, 2016 Brad Greenspan
2995 Woodside Road, Suite 400
Woodside, CA 94062 Gregory V. Varallo, Esquire
Kevin M. Gallagher, Esquire
Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A.
One Rodney Square
920 North King Street
Wilmington, DE 19801 Kevin M. Coen, Esquire
Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LP
1201 North Market Street
Wilmington, DE 19801 Kathaleen St. J. McCormick, Esquire
Daniel M. Kirshenbaum, Esquire
Young, Conaway, Stargatt & Taylor
100 North King Street
Wilmington, DE 19899 A. Thompson Bayliss, Esquire
Abrams & Bayliss LLP
20 Montchanin Road, Suite 200
Wilmington, DE 19807 Daniel B. Rath, Esquire
Rebecca L. Butcher, Esquire
Tyler O'Connell, Esquire
Landis Rath & Cobb LLP
919 North Market Street
Wilmington, DE 19801 Dear Counsel and Mr. Greenspan:
I have Mr. Greenspan's Motion for Recusal filed today. The Plaintiff's motion is grounded on substantially the same allegations pled in support of his "Application for Certification of Interlocutory Appeal" filed January 22, 2016. For the reasons stated in my Letter Opinion and Order of January 22, 2016 denying certification of interlocutory appeal, the Plaintiff's Motion for Recusal is DENIED. To the extent Mr. Greenspan attempts to include in his motion an additional ground for recusal based on alleged actions of the Register in Chancery's office, such ground is incoherent and fails to state a legal or equitable basis for recusal.
To the extent the foregoing requires an Order to take effect, IT IS SO ORDERED.
Sincerely,
/s/ Sam Glasscock III
Sam Glasscock