Opinion ID: 2360416
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Final Judgment Dispute

Text: Under Delaware law, the Court of Chancery retains jurisdiction over an action until it enters a final judgment. [3] A final judgment is generally defined as one that determines the merits of the controversy or defines the rights of the parties and leaves nothing for future determination or consideration. [4] In short, a final judgment is one that determines all the claims as to all the parties. The test for whether an order is final . . . is whether the trial court has clearly declared its intention that the order be the court's `final act' in a case. [5] The defendants argue that the Court of Chancery's dismissal of the First Amended Complaint comports with the definition of a final judgment because the Court of Chancery held that the Plaintiff has not alleged sufficient facts with particularity to excuse demand and, therefore, this action must be dismissed under Rule 23.1. [6] The defendants contend that that the Dismissal Order plainly dismissed the action in its entirety. The defendants submit that a dismissal of a complaint in its entirety, even though without prejudice, is nevertheless a dismissal, except that the Plaintiff's right to file a new complaint is not precluded by res judicata. [7] The Plaintiff responds that permitting a second amendment was proper because the Court of Chancery's Order dismissing the First Amended Complaint clearly was not a final judgment. The Plaintiff relies upon the fact that the order dismissing the First Amended Complaint was without prejudice. Therefore, the Plaintiff asserts, a dismissal without prejudice afforded him the opportunity to submit a motion for leave to file the Second Amended Complaint.