IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
IN AND FOR NEW CASTLE COUNTY
SCHICK INCORPORATED, )
Plaintiff,
v II
AMALGAMATED CLOTHING and
TEXTILE WORKERS UNION,
Defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Submitted: June 18, 1907
Decided: June 18, 1987
Paul P. Welsh, Esquire, of MORRIS, NICHOLS, ARSHT & TUNNELL,
Wilmington, Attorney for Plaintiff.
Allen M. Terrell, Jr., Esquire, and Nathan B. Ploener,
Esquire, of RICHARDS, LAYTON & FINGER, Wilmington, Attorneys
for Defendant.
ALLEN, Chancellor
Defendant has moved to stay discovery in this
declaratory judgment action pending resolution of its motion
to dismiss the complaint. For purposes of deciding this
motion I assume the factual allegations of the complaint to
be true. On that assumption, the relevant facts appear to
be as follows.
Plaintiff is a Delaware corporation with its principal
place of business in Connecticut. It owns, directly or
indirectly, ,a11 of the common stock of Reeves Brothers,
Inc., a corporation that operates two polyurethane foam
manufacturing plants in Cornelius, North Carolina. Defen-
dant is an unincorporated labor union that, since at least
May, 1986, has served as the collective bargaining represen-
tative of about 650 workers at the Reeves, North Carolina
plants. The parties have for some time been involved in
unsuccessful and, in some respects, turbulent collective
bargaining negotiations.
SNIPPETS:
Paul P. Welsh, Esquire, of MORRIS, NICHOLS, ARSHT & TUNNELL, Wilmington, Attorney for
Allen M. Terrell, Jr., Esquire, and Nathan B. Ploener, Esquire, of RICHARDS, LAYTON & FINGER,
Defendant has moved to stay discovery in this declaratory judgment action pending resolution
the relevant facts appear to be as follows.
Defendant is an unincorporated labor union that, since at least May, 1986, has served as the
The parties have for some time been involved in unsuccessful and, in some respects, turbulent
defendant purchased 71 shares of Schick common stock.
Those shares, it is alleged, were purchased not as an investment, but, rather, as a means to
workers, picketing of lending institutions and communications with debenture holders and
On May 15, 1987, defendant delivered to James W. Hart in his capacity as Secretary of
The record does not indicate how the corporation used the beach house or permitted it to be
plaintiff sought and obtained an ex parte order shortening defendant's time to answer and
purportedly "without entering a general appearance" 2 moved pursuant to Rule 12and to dismiss
It is well established that the court may stay disSee Ahercrombie v. Davies,.
Such a stay should not, in my opinion, be granted automatically but carefully only when
Insofar as discovery is sought with respect to defendant's assertion that such service of
|
