Opinion ID: 1497598
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 25

Heading: standard of review entire fairness determination

Text: The standard and scope of appellate review of the Court of Chancery's factual findings following a post-trial application of the entire fairness standard to a challenged merger is governed by Levitt v. Bouvier, Del.Supr., 287 A.2d 671, 673 (1972). See Rosenblatt v. Getty Oil Co., 493 A.2d at 937. In Levitt, this Court stated: In exercising our power of review, we have the duty to review the sufficiency of the evidence and to test the propriety of the findings below. We do not, however, ignore the findings made by the trial judge. If they are sufficiently supported by the record and are the product of an orderly and logical deductive process, in the exercise of judicial restraint we accept them, even though independently we might have reached opposite conclusions. It is only when the findings below are clearly wrong and the doing of justice requires their overturn that we are free to make contradictory findings of fact. When the determination of facts turns on a question of credibility and the acceptance or rejection of live testimony by the trial judge, his findings will be approved upon review. If there is sufficient evidence to support the findings of the trial judge, this Court, in the exercise of judicial restraint, must affirm. Levitt v. Bouvier, 287 A.2d at 673 (citations omitted). Accordingly, this Court will not ignore the findings of the Court of Chancery if they are sufficiently supported by the record and are the product of an orderly and logical deductive process. Id. In addition, this Court accords a high level of deference to Court of Chancery findings based on the evaluation of expert financial testimony. Kahn v. Household Acquisition Corp., Del. Supr., 591 A.2d 166, 175 (1991).