IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
IN AND FOR NEW CASTLE COUNTY - :
r-, ;
"-' .
",
EDWARD HANNA, > c I(
" :
>
Plaintiff, > :
> Civil Action No. r
,
V . >
< `1
> L. 1 -
,"
PRIMARY HEALTH SYSTEMS, INC. ) --,,:
>
Defendant. >
MOTION FOR EXPEDITED PROCEEDINGS
Plaintiff hereby moves the Court, pursuant to Rules 12(a) and 173 of the
Rules of the Court of Chancery, for the entry of an order in the form attached hereto,
expediting the proceedings in this action by requiring that defendant answer the
complaint by Monday, September 7, 1998, and by scheduling the trial of this action to
begin before Wednesday, September 16, 1998. The reasons for this motion are set forth
below.
Background
1. On August 21, 1998, plaintiff Edward Hanna ("Hanna"), a holder of
record of the class B common stock of defendant Primary Health Systems, Inc. ("PHS" or
the "Company"), made and mailed a written demand (the "Demand") in accordance with
Section 220 of the Delaware General Corporation Law demanding the right to inspect
and copy the stock list and certain specified books and records of the Company.
2. The Demand was sent on August 21, 1998, via certified mail to PHS at
both the office of its registered agent for service of process in Delaware and at its
SNIPPETS:
IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
MOTION FOR EXPEDITED PROCEEDINGS
Plaintiff hereby moves the Court, pursuant to Rules 12and 173 of the
Rules of the Court of Chancery, for the entry of an order in the form attached hereto,
expediting the proceedings in this action by requiring that defendant answer the
complaint by Monday, September 7, 1998, and by scheduling the trial of this action to
made and mailed a written demand in accordance with
and copy the stock list and certain specified books and records of the Company.
The Demand was sent on August 21, 1998, via certified mail to PHS at
principal place of business in Pennsylvania.
the Demand was received by PHS, and the Company still has not permitted Hanna to
possible mismanagement of PHS in light of the precipitous losses sustained by PHS
members of PHS' board of directors.
well for Hanna to value his shares.
Rainbow Navigation, Inc. v. Pan Ocean Navigation, Del.
(noting that Section 220 actions are "normally expedited"); A4&z Corp. V. Heli-Coil Corp.,
Expedition is especially important in this action.
the combination of this precipitous loss and the
corresponding resignation of nearly all the members of the board of directors of PHS
merit an urgent investigation into possible mismanagement within the Company.
|