In Crescent/Mach I Partnership, L.P., et al. v. Dr Pepper Bottling Co. of Texas, (Del. Ch., June 4, 2008), read opinion here, the Chancery Court applied Rule 60(a) to fix a computational error in its Discounted Cash Flow analysis in connection with its decision in an appraisal action. The citation for the opinion with the computational error is: Crescent/Mach I P’ship, L.P. v. Dr Pepper Bottling Co. of Texas, 2007 WL 1342263 (Del. Ch., May 2, 2007) which was summarized on this blog here. A prior opinion in this case denying summary judgment was highlighted on this blog here.
The court provides an extensive discussion of the types of errors covered by Rule 60(a) such as clerical errors and the like. In addition, the court made clear that its inherent power to correct its own clerical errors is not limited by any agreement that the parties may make based on an incorrect decision. Thus, the court rejected an argument based on unilateral mistake related to a settlement agreement that the parties entered into based on the court’s original opinion–which was not appealed. The parties did not bring the clerical error to the court’s attention until several months after the opinion was issued–and after the parties themselves agreed on the form of Order that incorporated the court’s miscalculations.