Emerging Growth Fund, L.P. v. Figlus, C.A. No. 7936-VCP (Del. Ch. Mar. 28, 2013).

This Chancery opinion denies a claim for advancement which was made as part of and in the context of a motion for a preliminary injunction to enforce the terms of the parties’ partnership agreement. Applying basic contract interpretation principles, the court found that the relevant provision was only contained in a separate subscription agreement about which, at this early stage of the proceeding, there was no record of any triggers to applicability. The court also noted the the plaintiff was affiliated with the ex-wife of the defendant, both of whom were in the middle of a separate divorce and property distribution proceeding, which included a division of the partnership assets. Compare: recent Chancery ruling that also determined that a deferral of an advancement claim was warranted, as highlighted on these pages.