Case Title: Manheim v. Ban

Citation: 

Docket Number: 377, 2023

State: delaware

Court: Delaware Supreme Court

Date: 2024-04-22T00:00:00Z

Document:
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE 
 
JOSEPH MANHEIM; WEST 36TH, INC.; 
§ 
and REATH & CO., LLC,  
 
 
§ 
§    No.  377, 2023 
Defendants-Below,  
 
§ 
Appellants,   
 
 
§ 
§    Court Below: Court of Chancery 
v. 
 
 
 
 
 
§    of the State of Delaware 
 
  
 
 
 
 
  
 
§ 
 
YOUNG MIN BAN, 
 
 
 
§    C.A. No. 2019-0005 
 
 
 
 
 
 
§ 
Plaintiff-Below,   
 
§ 
Appellee. 
 
 
 
§  
 
 
 
 
 
Submitted: April 17, 2024 
 
Decided: 
April 22, 2024 
 
Before VALIHURA, LEGROW, and GRIFFITHS, Justices. 
 
ORDER 
This 22nd day of April, 2024, after careful consideration of the parties’ briefs 
and the record below, and following oral argument, we find it evident that the 
judgment of the Court of Chancery should be affirmed on the basis of and for the 
reasons stated in the Memorandum Opinion dated June 24, 2022,1 and the Final 
Order and Judgment dated September 6, 2023. 
 
1 Appellants argued for the first time on appeal that the Court of Chancery’s factual findings about 
Appellee’s “unauthorized DropBox access” support “actionable” claims.  That argument advances 
novel legal issues that Appellants never raised to the trial court.  See App. to Opening Br. at A573 
(trial court’s post-trial factual findings regarding DropBox account); A574-654 and A698-741 
(Appellants’ post-trial briefs addressing the parties’ claims in light of the trial court’s post-trial 
factual findings).  This argument therefore is waived and we do not address its merits.  See Supr. 
2 
 
 
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the judgment of the Court of 
Chancery is AFFIRMED. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
BY THE COURT: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
/s/ Abigail M. LeGrow 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Justice 
 
Ct. R. 8; Holifield v. XRI Inv. Hldgs LLC, 304 A.3d 896, 921 (Del. 2023) (“With respect to whether 
a party has preserved an issue on appeal, we will independently examine ‘the record below.’”) 
(quoting CompoSecure, L.L.C. v. CardUX, LLC, 206 A.3d 807, 810 (Del. 2018)); Protech 
Minerals, Inc. v. Dugout Team, LLC, 284 A.3d 369, 379 (Del. 2022) (finding that appellants had 
not preserved an argument for appeal when they failed to argue the issue to trial court).