Marino v. Patriot Rail Company LLC
Court of Chancery of Delaware
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
LASTER, Vice Chancellor
Plaintiff Gary 0. Marino seeks advancements of fees and expenses from defendant Patriot Rail Company LLC (the “Company”). The parties have cross-moved for summary judgment. Marino’s motion is granted. The Company’s motion is denied.
I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND
The facts are drawn from the affidavits and supporting documents that the parties submitted in connection with their motions for summary judgment. The parties agreed in their briefs and at oral argument that there were- no disputes of material fact that would affect the outcome. Pursuant to Court of Chancery Rule…
2Cases cited29 opinions
- Revlon, Inc. v. MacAndrews & Forbes Holdings, Inc.Supreme Court of Delaware · 1986
- Smith v. Van GorkomSupreme Court of Delaware · 1985
- Unocal Corp. v. Mesa Petroleum Co.Supreme Court of Delaware · 1985
- Citadel Holding Corp. v. RovenSupreme Court of Delaware · 1992
- Unitrin, Inc. v. American General Corp.Supreme Court of Delaware · 1995
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by20 opinions
- Sandt v. Energy Maintenance Services Group I, LLCCourt of Appeals of Texas · 2017
- In re Racing Servs., Inc.United States Bankruptcy Court, D. North Dakota · 2018
- Autumn Tangas v. IHOPCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2019
- David Goldman v. LBG Real Estate Companies, LLCCourt of Chancery of Delaware · 2024
- Energy Founders Fund v. DaskevichTexas Business Court · 2026
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.