Ridgely’s Notebook II, 450
High Court of Errors and Appeals of Delaware.
June 17, 1819.
On the application and consent of Mr. Reed for the plaintiff in error and Mr. Vandyke and Mr. Rogers.,
counsel for the defendant in error, the Court allows this cause to be continued, on account of the length of the session of the Court this term and the quantity of other important business before the Court. But it is understood that the consent of counsel for the continuance shall not be, and is not, a sufficient reason for a continuance.
ROBERT LYONS Defendant Below, Appellant, v. DBHI, LLC, KURT T. BRYSON and RHONDA BRYSON Defendants…
TWITTER, INC., Plaintiff, v. ELON R. MUSK, X HOLDINGS I, INC., and X HOLDINGS II,…
Re: Twitter, Inc., v. Elon R. Musk et al. C.A. No. 2022-0613-KSJM.Court of Chancery of…
Re: Twitter, Inc., v. Elon R. Musk et al. C.A. No. 2022-0613-KSJM.Court of Chancery of…
179 A.3d 824 (2018) CALIFORNIA STATE TEACHERS' RETIREMENT SYSTEM, New York City Employees' Retirement System,…
STATE OF DELAWARE, Plaintiff, v. FREDDY L. FLONNORY, Defendant. Cr. ID. No. 9707012190 SUPERIOR COURT…