Title: Kent County Levy Court v. Upfront Enterprises

State: delaware

Issuer: Delaware Supreme Court

Document:

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE.

THE KENT COUNTY LEVY

COURT, the governing body of No. 351, 2007

Kent County, Delaware,

P, BROOKS BANTA, ALLAN F. Court Below-Court of Chancery
ANGEL, HAROLD BRODE, of the State of Delaware, in and for
ERIC BUCKSON, BRADLEY S. Kent County

EABY and RICHARD E. ENNIS,

in their official capacities as

members of the Kent County C.A. No. 2678

Levy Court,

Respondents Below,
Appellants,

UPFRONT ENTERPRISES, LLC,
a Delaware limited liability company, §
on its own behalf and on behalf of all §
others ly situated,

 

Petitioner Below,
Appellee.

Submitted: September 12, 2007
Decided: September 17, 2007

Before BERGER, JACOBS and RIDGELY, Justices.
ORDER
This appeal, having been considered by the Court on the briefs and arguments
of the parties, and the Court having determined that appellants’ adoption of

Ordinance 07-24 moots the issue on appeal,
ITISHEREBY ORDERED that the above-captioned appeal be, and the same

hereby is DISMISSED as moot.'

BY THE COURT:

 

The Court announced its decision at oral argument, stating that acceptance of this
interlocutory appeal was improvidently granted in light of the enactment of the new moratorium
‘ordinance. In fact, the trial court entered a final judgment without deciding all claims pursuant to
Ch. CLR. $4(b). ‘Thus, appellants filed this appeal without resort to Supr. Ct. R. 42, governing
interlocutory appeals. We note, however, that “the policy underlying the final judgment rue is one
of efficient use of judicial resources through disposition of cases as a whole, rather than piecemeal.”
Tyson Foods, Inc. v. Aetos Corp., 809 A.2d 575, 580 (Del. 2002). But for the entry of a Rule 54(6)
final judgment, this would be an interlocutory appeal, as numerous issues relating tothe moratorium
‘and appellee's attempts to develop certain property remain to be decided by the trial court. The
policy against piecemeal litigation applies forcefully to this ongoing and evolving litigation.

2