Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Litigation Blogs -> Delaware Corporate and Commercial Litigation Blog
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense
Find a Local Lawyer
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402
Litigation
: Delaware Corporate and Commercial Litigation BlogChancery Court Addresses Limited Scope of Its Subject Matter Jurisdiction
By Francis G. X. Pileggi, Esq.
In Medek v. Medek, 2008 WL 4261017 (Del. Ch., Sept. 10, 2008), the Delaware Chancery Court described in great detail the limited scope of its subject matter jurisdiction, based in the distinction between the courts of equity as they were separated in "merry old England" compared to what were described as the "law courts". Still today, the Chancery Court in Delaware is a separate court of equity as compared to the Delaware Superior Court which is a "law court" (and the trial court of general jurisdiction, i.e., basically everything that is not within Chancery's jurisdiction).
This case describes the circumscribed prerequisites for invoking Chancery Court's jurisdiction as well as the "clean-up doctrine" which allows a court of equity to retain jurisdiction over matters that would otherwise be in the "law court's" jurisdiction. See footnotes 25 to 40 and related text. Chancery will retain that part of the case that seeks only damages (as opposed to equitable relief) in order to "do complete justice" and to avoid "piecemeal litigation" involving the same basic dispute.
( Cf. Recent Chancery Court decision within the last few days, summarized here, which allowed a case in Superior Court to go forward while the Chancery Court case between the same parties was stayed, in large part because the Chancery Court could not provide a jury trial on damages which is what the plaintiff in the related case had requested.)
The Court in this case noted that the claim based on the Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act was one in which there might be concurrent jurisdiction with the Superior Court but that it was well-settled that the Chancery Court had jurisdiction over such claims and that under the "clean-up doctrine" it would also retain jurisdiction for a related breach of contract claim.
Also, procedurally, there was an instructive ruling that granted partial summary judgment for the plaintiff rejecting the affirmative defenses of laches and waiver that the defendant had asserted.
Full post as published by Delaware Corporate and Commercial Litigation Blog on September 21, 2008 (boomark / email).
Selection of State Supreme Court Judges
How State Court Judges are Selected
Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice Career Choices
Descriptions of law enforcement occupations
California Supreme Court Proposition 8 Decision
Court Rejects Challenges to Proposition 8, but Finds Marriages Valid
Is Barack Obama a Natural Born Citizen?
Wrotnowski v. Bysiewicz (Supreme Court): Does Obama meet the constitutional requirements to be President
Heart of Atlanta v United States
Supreme Court Decision: Civil Rights Act Protected by Interstate Commerce Clause
Unwed Fathers' Rights in Adoption
Landmark Cases in Adoption Law Shape Law with respect to Unwed Fathers
Oil and Gas
industry workers allegedly subject to serious accident injury from hazardous conditions.
Explicit E-Mail
Adult website fined $413,000 in explicit e-mail matter.
Workplace Injuries
Packaging Concepts Limited must pay undisclosed settlement for employees' injuries.
Ebay Fined
French Court Sets Fine at $61 Million
Personal Injury
Appeals Court Upholds Congressional Legislation
T-mobile data plans, T-mobile, t-mobile phones
T-Mobile Faces Class Action over Limited Unlimited Data Plans

CA1: 1983 state action failures are not a matter of subject matter jurisdiction
Straub: No Subject Matter Jurisdiction needed for Criminal Contempt
Chancery Addresses Adverse Possession Issues
Prof. Floyd Publishes Article on Supplemental Jurisdiction
Chancery Stays Dissolution Action Pending Superior Court Damages Case
Court of Chancery Limits Jurisdiction Over Officers








