Baypo Ltd. Partnership v. Technology Jv, Lp
Court of Chancery of Delaware
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
LAMB, Vice Chancellor.
The plaintiffs in this action lost in arbitration based on contract language they claim does not reflect the agreement of the parties but instead (at least as interpreted by the arbitrators) is the result of mistake. The plaintiffs now seek to reform the contract, arguing that their claim for reformation is not subject to the otherwise broad arbitration clause governing the parties’ commercial relationship. The defendants move to dismiss arguing, among other things, that the claims asserted are subject to arbitration.
In light of the recent decision of the Delaware…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- In Re General Motors (Hughes) Shareholder LitigationSupreme Court of Delaware · 2006
- Grobow v. PerotSupreme Court of Delaware · 1988
- E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co. v. Shell Oil Co.Supreme Court of Delaware · 1985
- Vanderbilt Income & Growth Associates, L.L.C. v. Arvida/JMB Managers, Inc.Supreme Court of Delaware · 1996
- James & Jackson, LLC. v. Willie Gary, LLC.Supreme Court of Delaware · 2006
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- McLaughlin v. McCannCourt of Chancery of Delaware · 2008
- GTSI CORP. v. Eyak Technology, LLCCourt of Chancery of Delaware · 2010
- Halliburton Company v. KBR, Inc., Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston)2014
- 360 Campaign Consulting, LLC v. Diversity Communication, LLCCourt of Chancery of Delaware · 2020
- Bee v. RAH Equity Holdings, LLCConnecticut Appellate Court · 2026
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.