From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Hoofe v. Keene Corporation

Supreme Court of Delaware
Mar 25, 1971
276 A.2d 269 (Del. 1971)

Opinion

March 25, 1971.

Rodman Ward, Jr., of Prickett, Ward, Burt Sanders, Wilmington, for appellant.

Hugh L. Corroon, of Potter Anderson Corroon, Wilmington, for appellee.

Before WOLCOTT, C.J., and CAREY and HERRMANN, JJ., sitting.


This is an appeal from the grant by the Vice Chancellor of the plaintiff's motion for summary judgment for the recovery of certain shares of its stock issued to the plaintiff pursuant to the defendant's Stock Option Plan. The defendant also appeals from the denial of his cross-motion for summary judgment on his counterclaim. The plaintiff has moved to dismiss the defendant's appeal.

The relevant facts are set out carefully and at length in the opinion of the Vice Chancellor reported at 267 A.2d 618. We affirm the decision of the Vice Chancellor for the reasons set forth in his opinion. We further hold that the order denying the cross-motions for summary judgment on the defendant's counterclaim involved neither an adjudication of legal right nor substantial issue, and is therefore an unappealable interlocutory order. Cross v. Hair, Del.Supr., 258 A.2d 277 (1969).


Summaries of

Hoofe v. Keene Corporation

Supreme Court of Delaware
Mar 25, 1971
276 A.2d 269 (Del. 1971)
Case details for

Hoofe v. Keene Corporation

Case Details

Full title:William J. HOOFE, III, Defendant Below, Appellant, v. KEENE CORPORATION…

Court:Supreme Court of Delaware

Date published: Mar 25, 1971

Citations

276 A.2d 269 (Del. 1971)

Citing Cases

Irwin Leighton v. W.M. Anderson Co.

While the affidavits of plaintiff, even if believed, are far less than compelling, they do succeed in…

Western Air Lines, Inc. v. Allegheny Airlines

Surely, any or all of them do not amount to a waiver, a knowing relinquishment of a known right. And the…