COURT OF CHANCERY

OF THE

STATE OF DELAWARE

KATHALEEN ST. J. MCCORMICK

CHANCELLOR

LEONARD L. WILLIAMS JUSTICE CENTER

500 N. KING STREET, SUITE 11400

WILMINGTON, DELAWARE 19801-3734

August 12, 2024

David N. Rutt

Moore & Rutt, P.A.

122 W. Market Street

Georgetown, DE 19947

Damien Nicholas Tancredi 

Flaster Greenberg P.C.

1007 N. Orange Street, Suite 400

Wilmington, DE 19801

Re: Kimberly S. Fischer v. Tina Renee Rambo

C.A. No. 2022-1159-SEM

Dear Counsel:

This letter opinion resolves the plaintiff’s exceptions to the Magistrate’s final 

report recommending that the court deny the plaintiff’s motion for summary 

judgment (the “Final Report”).

1 Magistrate Selena E. Molina issued the Final Report 

on May 31, 2024.

2 The plaintiff took exceptions timely, on June 10, 2024.3 I 

reassigned this matter to myself for the limited purpose of resolving the plaintiff’s 

exceptions.4 This court applies de novo review to the factual and legal findings of a 

Magistrate.5 I have reviewed the plaintiff’s motion de novo and agree with the 

Magistrate’s well-reasoned Final Report.

1 C.A. No. 2022-1159-SEM Docket (“Dkt.”) 46. 

2 Dkt. 45.

3 Dkt. 46. 

4 Dkt. 47.

5 DiGiacobbe v. Sestak, 743 A.2d 180, 184 (Del. 1999).
C.A. No. 2022-1159-SEM

August 12, 2024

Page 2 of 3

“There is no right to a summary judgment.”6 “Even where the facts are not in 

dispute, a court may decline to grant summary judgment where a more thorough 

exploration of the facts is needed to properly apply the law to the circumstances.”7 

“When an ultimate fact to be determined is one of motive, intention or other subjective 

matter, summary judgment is ordinarily inappropriate.”8 The court may “decline to 

decide the merits of the case in a summary adjudication where it is not reasonably 

certain that there is no triable issue.”9 

Like Magistrate Judge Molina, I decline to decide the merits of the case on 

summary judgment. There are many moving parts in this litigation. The defendant 

has been granted leave to amend her answer. Legal issues, such as standing, the 

merit of the defenses, and any preclusive effect from the first action, could benefit 

6 Stone & Paper Invs., LLC v. Blanch, 2020 WL 6373167, at *1 (Del. Ch. Oct. 30, 2020)

(internal quotation marks omitted) (quoting Telxon Corp. v. Meyerson, 802 A.2d 257,

262 (Del. 2002)).

7 In re Tri-Star Pictures, Inc., Litig., 1995 WL 106520, at *5 (Del. Ch. Mar. 9, 1995)

(citations omitted); see also In re El Paso Pipeline P’rs, L.P. Deriv. Litig., 2014 WL

2768782, at *9 (Del. Ch. June 12, 2014) (“[T]he court may, in its discretion, deny

summary judgment if it decides upon a preliminary examination of the facts

presented that it is desirable to inquire into and develop the facts more thoroughly at

trial in order to clarify the law or its application.” (citations omitted)).

8 Cont’l Oil Co. v. Pauley Petroleum, Inc., 251 A.2d 824, 826 (Del. 1969) (citations

omitted); see also Amirsaleh v. Bd. of Trade of City of N.Y., Inc., 2009 WL 3756700,

at *4 (Del. Ch. Nov. 9, 2009) (“Where intent or state of mind is material to the claim

at issue . . .summary judgment is not appropriate.” (citation omitted)).

9 Unbound P’rs Ltd. P’ship v. Invoy Hldgs. Inc., 251 A.3d 1016, 1024 (Del. Super.

2021) (internal quotation marks omitted) (quoting Parexel Int’l (IRL) Ltd. v. Xyomic

Pharms., Inc., 2020 WL 5202083, at *4 (Del. Super. Ct. Sept. 1, 2020)) (interpreting

parallel rule of the Delaware Superior Court).
C.A. No. 2022-1159-SEM

August 12, 2024

Page 3 of 3

from further briefing. The factual issues in play require, or at least would benefit 

from, further factual discovery. 

The exceptions are overruled, and the case is reassigned back to Magistrate 

Molina for all purposes.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Sincerely,

/s/ Kathaleen St. J. McCormick

Chancellor

cc: All counsel of record (by File & ServeXpress)