Brandt v. CNS Response, Inc., No. 4773-CC (Del. Ch., Aug. 3, 2009), read letter decision here.
This 2-page letter decision denied a Motion to Expedite Proceedings and an Application for Emergency Injunctive Relief in connection with a Section 220 action seeking books and records prior to an annual meeting.
The reasoning for the court’s decision was based on the understanding of the court that the director seeking books and records had been told that the books and records that he sought were available at the company’s offices more than three weeks previously for him to review and copy but that he did not avail himself of that offer. Thus the court concluded that the applicant’s “leisurely approach to the matter . . . does not lead the Court to now believe that an emergency exists that the court must remedy today or tomorrow [which is when the applicant wanted an expedited hearing].” Thus, the Section 220 case would proceed, but not on an expedited basis. (Note that a 220 case is already considered a "summary proceeding".)
Of particular note is the concluding sentence of the court’s ruling which might apply to many lawsuits. The court concluded as follows:
"I will end with a bit of free advice: CNS and its stockholders would be well served if the litigants in this lawsuit would sit down and have a serious, reasonable and thoughtful discussion about how to find a compromise to this wholly unnecessary Section 220 lawsuit.”