In Dweck v. Nasar, download file, the Chancery Court ruled that an unsigned shareholders’ agreement could not be specifically enforced because the court treated it as a voting agreement which must be a signed document to be enforceable under the DGCL.
For that reason, a claim under DGCL Section 226 was also denied. For further discussion of the appointment of a custodian pursuant to Section 226, due to a deadlock in a corporation, see Bentas v. Haseotes, 769 A.2d 70 (Del. Ch. 2000) and Bentas v. Haseotes, 2003 WL 1711856 (Del. Ch.).