James v. Furman, et al.
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE WILLIAM B. CHANDLER III CHANCELLOR P.O. BOX 581 GEORGETOWN, DE 19947 TELEPHONE (302) 856-5424 FACSIMILE (302) 856-5251 Submitted: November 22, 2004 Decided: November 29, 2004 Arthur L. Dent Potter Anderson & Corroon LLP P.O. Box 951 Wilmington, DE 19899 Raymond J. DiCamillo Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A. P.O. Box 551 Wilmington, DE 19899 Re: Alan James v. William A. Furman, et al. Civil Action No. 597-N Dear Counsel: I have considered defendants request for a stay of discovery, for a continuance of trial and plaintiff s response thereto. Trial is currently scheduled for January 24, 2005. For the reasons discussed below I deny defendant s requested stay of discovery, but I grant the requested continuance of trial. Defendants have filed and submitted a brief in favor of their motion for summary judgment. Plaintiff has a right to prepare its answer to the summary judgment motion based upon the full record, not just those facts asserted by defendants. Defendants assertion that plaintiff s remaining claims are moot as a result of the board action taken on November 9, 2004, is insufficient to deny plaintiff the procedural right of developing its own independent record. I, therefore, deny the defendants request for a stay of discovery. I do, however, believe that all parties would be benefited by postponing the trial date until the motion for summary judgment is decided and, therefore, I grant the defendants requested continuance of trial. A new trial date will be set, if necessary, after the motion for summary judgment is resolved. IT IS SO ORDERED. Very truly yours, /s/ William B. Chandler III William B. Chandler III WBCIII:jsm 2
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
