Cartanza v. Cartanza, C.A. No. 7618-VCP (Del. Ch. July 8, 2013).

Bottom line: This short letter ruling amplified the reasoning in the court’s prior decision in this case, highlighted here, in which the court awarded fees in connection with a motion to compel a deposition. The point of this short post is to serve as a reminder of how difficult it is to prevail on a motion for reconsideration. This decision explains why the motion to reconsider was denied. The decision also serves as an example of what the court expects of counsel in connection with responding to requests for deposition dates.