Title: Buchanan Ingersoll & Rooney, P.C. v. Nine Ninety Nine, L.L.C.

State: delaware

Issuer: Delaware Supreme Court

Document:

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE 
 
BUCHANAN INGERSOLL & 
ROONEY, P.C., and RICHARD 
FORSTEN, 
 
Defendants Below- 
Appellants, 
 
v. 
 
NINE NINETY NINE, L.L.C., 
 
Plaintiff Below- 
Appellee. 
§ 
§ 
§  No. 436, 2011 
§ 
§ 
§ 
§  Court Below—Superior Court 
§  of the State of Delaware, 
§  in and for New Castle County 
§  C.A. No. 08C-12-258 
§ 
§ 
§ 
 
Submitted:  August 17, 2011 
Decided:  August 25, 2011 
 
Before STEELE, Chief Justice, HOLLAND, and RIDGELY, Justices. 
 
 
O R D E R 
 
This 25th day of August 2011, it appears to the Court that: 
(1) 
The defendants-appellants have petitioned this Court, pursuant to 
Supreme Court Rule 42, to accept an appeal from an interlocutory order of the 
Superior Court dated July 29, 2011.  Among other things, the trial court’s order 
denied the defendants’ motion for summary judgment on statute of limitations 
grounds. 
(2) 
The defendants filed their application for certification to take an 
interlocutory appeal in the Superior Court on August 8, 2011.  The Superior Court 
denied the certification application on August 16, 2011.  When the trial judge 
 
 
-2-
denied the certification, he expressed the view that even if this Court reversed on 
the statute of limitations question, the case would be remanded and remain active. 
(3) 
Applications for interlocutory review are addressed to the sound 
discretion of this Court.  In the exercise of its discretion, this Court has concluded 
that the application for interlocutory review does not meet the requirements of 
Supreme Court Rule 42(b) and should be refused. 
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the within 
interlocutory appeal be REFUSED. 
BY THE COURT: 
 
/s/ Myron T. Steele 
Chief Justice