Summary
The Delaware Supreme Court refused Campbell’s appeal from Court of Chancery orders concerning contempt and disgorgement for violating a status quo order. The Court held that the appeal was not immediately appealable under the collateral order doctrine and that the application for interlocutory review was untimely and did not satisfy the applicable standards.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the Court of Chancery's contempt and disgorgement-related orders were immediately appealable under the collateral order doctrine.
- Whether the Delaware Supreme Court should accept interlocutory review under Supreme Court Rule 42.
- Whether Campbell's application for certification was timely and presented exceptional circumstances warranting interlocutory review.
Holdings
- The collateral order doctrine did not apply to the Court of Chancery's orders in this case.
- The Supreme Court refused interlocutory review because the application was untimely, no exceptional circumstances warranted review, and the potential benefits did not outweigh the inefficiency, disruption, and probable costs of an interlocutory appeal.
Key quotations
“In the exercise of its discretion and giving great weight to the trial court’s review, this Court has concluded that the application for interlocutory review does not meet the strict standards for certification under Supreme Court Rule 42(b).” (at 5)
Factual background
The Court of Chancery had entered a status quo order requiring Campbell to give Eagle Force ten days' advance notice of transactions subject to the order. After remand from an earlier appeal, the Court of Chancery held Campbell bound by the order during the appeal period and entered orders requiring him to disgorge $1,097,558.47 pursuant to a stipulated proposed order. Campbell sought interlocutory review of the contempt and disgorgement-related orders.
Procedural history
The Court of Chancery entered a status quo order requiring Campbell to provide ten days' advance notice of covered transactions and later found him in contempt. After an earlier appeal concerning the Court of Chancery's personal jurisdiction, the Supreme Court held that violations of a status quo order could be punished even if the court ultimately lacked jurisdiction. On remand, the Court of Chancery held Campbell bound by the order during the appeal period, accepted a stipulated disgorgement amount, and denied certification of an interlocutory appeal as untimely and lacking a substantial issue. The Supreme Court refused review.