Robert O. Carr v. Global Payments, Inc., et al.

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
SAM GLASSCOCK III VICE CHANCELLOR COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE COURT OF CHANCERY COURTHOUSE 34 THE CIRCLE GEORGETOWN, DELAWARE 19947 November 5, 2019 A. Thompson Bayliss Adam K. Schulman Abrams & Bayliss LLP 20 Montchanin Road, Suite 200 Wilmington, DE 19807 T. Brad Davey Andrew H. Sauder Potter Anderson & Corroon LLP 1313 N. Market Street Wilmington, DE 19899 RE: Robert O. Carr v. Global Payments Inc. and Heartland Payment Systems, LLC; C.A. No. 2018-0565-SG; Motion for Reargument Date Submitted: November 4, 2019 Date Decided: November 5, 2019 Dear Counsel: Before me is Plaintiff’s Motion for Reargument. The matter involves an advancement claim. I began the Memorandum Opinion under consideration by noting that such actions are often redolent of buyer’s remorse. Any judicial decision granting a motion for reargument must be a subject of unqualified judicial remorse. This is such a decision. My Memorandum Opinion of October 31, 2019 contains a basic and substantial error of fact. Upon review of the Plaintiff’s Motion, it is clear that it must be withdrawn, which is the object of this Letter Order. Whether, and to what extent, the rectification of the error requires a substantive change in the outcome of the advancement issue therein addressed awaits briefing on the Motion for Reargument, but it is clear that regardless of that ultimate outcome, the Memorandum Opinion should be, and hereby is, withdrawn. I take exception to one assertion made in Plaintiff’s Motion. He blames the error in the Memorandum Opinion on the Defendants. That assertion is misplaced. Responsibility rests solely with the finder of fact, the author of the Memorandum Opinion. My Memorandum Opinion of October 31, 2019 is WITHDRAWN. To the extent the foregoing requires an order to take effect, it is SO ORDERED. Sincerely, /s/ Sam Glasscock III Sam Glasscock III 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.