Court Explains Deferred Ruling on Request for Advancement of Fees
R & R Capital LLC v. Merritt, C.A. No. 3989-VCG (Del. Ch. March 15, 2013).
This is a ruling upon remand from the Delaware Supreme Court, asking the Court of Chancery to explain more clearly its deferral of a ruling on a claim for advancement. The court also explains the standards that apply to both imposing a status quo order and seeking an amendment of a status quo order. See footnotes 73 to 77. The court explained in this 30-page opinion why the prior deferral was warranted in the context of a stay of the case that was also in effect, as well as other reasons. We will not recount what the court referred to as the “veritable nightmare” of this case’s procedural history.
See prior Chancery 2009 decision in this case highlighted on these pages here. See also separate Chancery ruling in unrelated Emerging Growth Fund case, decided in the same month, that also dealt with deferral of a ruling on a clam for advancement, highlighted on these pages here.