Anvil Holding Corp. v. Iron Acquisition Co., Inc., C.A. No. 7975-VCP (Del. Ch. Aug. 16, 2013).
This case addressed the issue of whether a particular claim can form the basis of both a breach of contract and a fraud claim. A prior Chancery decision in this case was highlighted on these pages at this link.
The bottom line is that the Court ruled that: “Plaintiffs had a fair opportunity to allege a claim for bad faith breach of contract that differed from their fraud claim. They failed to do so. Instead, plaintiffs chose to stand on their Complaint and Answer the Motion to Dismiss. ”Plaintiffs had an opportunity to articulate how their bad faith breach of contract was any different from the fraud claim, if at all, but did not do so.
This decision was made in the context of a Motion for Reargument under Court of Chancery Rule 59(f). Alternatively, the plaintiffs sought to amend or alter in the judgment. That Motion was also denied.
A procedurally uncommon feature of this case is that it involves an Order of the Chief Justice of the Delaware Supreme Court that designated the Vice Chancellor on this case to also sit as a Superior Court Judge to hear and determine issues of the related Superior Court action that was consolidated. This opinion therefore deals with both a related Superior Court case and the Chancery action.
This ruling denied a motion to reargue or to amend the decision made on May 17, 2013 in a ruling on the Motion to Dismiss the Superior Court Complaint. See 2013 WL 2249655 (Del. Ch. May 17, 2013).