Task: Wrong Candidate Generation
Input (English): Corp. v. Theriault, 51 A.3d 1213 (Del.2012). 133 . Id. at 1239. 134 . In re S. Peru Copper Corp. S’holder Litig., 52 A.3d 761, 766 (Del.Ch.2011) ("The parties agree that the appropriate standard of review is entire fairness.”). 135 . E.g., Weinberger v. UOP, Inc., 457 A.2d 701, 710 (Del.1983) ("The requirement of fairness is unflinching in its demand that where one stands on both sides of a transaction, he has the burden of establishing its entire fairness, sufficient to pass the test of careful scrutiny by the courts.”). 136 . See, e.g., Sternberg v. O'Neil, 550 A.2d 1105, 1116 (Del.1988) (noting that statements from Shaffer v. Heitner, 433 U.S. 186, 97 S.Ct. 2569, 53 L.Ed.2d 683 (1977), must be "read in context”); Rabkin v. Philip A. Hunt Chem. Corp., 498 A.2d 1099, 1104 (Del.1985) (<HOLDING>). 137 . See In re CNX Gas Corp. S’holders 
 Holding statements: (A) holding that when determining the adequacy of a jury charge an appellate court should look to the record and the closing arguments to place the words of the judge in context (B) holding that in the context of a rule 10b5 claim when the merger was approved and the exchange of securities occurred the owner of stock had in effect purchased a new security and paid for it by turning in his old one (C) holding that court had no supplemental jurisdiction over claim by shareholder for breach of merger agreement that was the subject of the dispute between the merger partners over which the district court had subject matter jurisdiction (D) holding that proper exhaustion of administrative remedies is necessary under section 1997ea (E) holding that it is necessary to take account of the entire context of weinberger 457 a2d 701 when determining remedies in a cashout merger
Output (English): holding that when determining the adequacy of a jury charge an appellate court should look to the record and the closing arguments to place the words of the judge in context