Musk v. Arkansas Teacher Retirement System

CourtSupreme Court of Delaware
DecidedMay 3, 2018
Docket221, 2018
StatusPublished

This text of Musk v. Arkansas Teacher Retirement System (Musk v. Arkansas Teacher Retirement System) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Delaware primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Musk v. Arkansas Teacher Retirement System, (Del. 2018).

Opinion

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE

ELON MUSK, BRAD W. BUSS, § ROBYN M. DENHOLM, § No. 221, 2018 IRA EHRENPREIS, § ANTONIO J. GRACIAS, § Court Below: Court of Chancery of STEPHEN T. JURVETSON, and § the State of Delaware KIMBAL MUSK, § § Consolidated C.A. No. 12711 Defendants Below, § Appellants, § § and § § TESLA, INC., § § Nominal Defendant Below, § Appellant, § § v. § § ARKANSAS TEACHER § RETIREMENT SYSTEM, § BOSTON RETIREMENT SYSTEM, § ROOFERS LOCAL 149 PENSION § FUND, § OKLAHOMA FIREFIGHTERS § PENSION AND RETIREMENT § SYSTEM, § KBC ASSET MANAGEMENT NV, § ERSTE-SPARINVEST § KAPITALANLAGEGESELLSCHAFT § M.B.H., § STICHTING BLUE SKY ACTIVE § LARGE CAP EQUITY FUND USA, § and AARON ROCKE, § § Plaintiffs Below, § Appellees. §

Submitted: April 27, 2018 Decided: May 3, 2018 Before VALIHURA, VAUGHN, and SEITZ, Justices.

ORDER

This 3rd day of May 2018, upon consideration of defendant’s-appellant’s

appeal from interlocutory order, it appears to the Court that:

The defendants-appellants seek interlocutory review of the Court of

Chancery’s opinion of March 28, 2018, denying their motion to dismiss the

plaintiffs-appellees’ second amended verified class action and derivative complaint

under Court of Chancery Rule 12(b)(6).1 The Court of Chancery refused the

application for certification in a detailed order dated April 27, 2018, explaining why

interlocutory review was not warranted under the principles and criteria of Supreme

Court Rule 42(b). Interlocutory review is addressed to the sound discretion of the

Court.2 In the exercise of our discretion, we conclude that the application for

interlocutory review does not meet the strict standards for certification under Rule

42(b).

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the interlocutory appeal is

REFUSED.

BY THE COURT:

/s/ James T. Vaughn, Jr. Justice

1 In re Tesla Motors, Inc. S’holder Litig., 2018 WL 1560293 (Del. Ch. Mar. 28, 2018). 2 Del. Supr. Ct. R. 42(d)(v). 2

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Musk v. Arkansas Teacher Retirement System, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/musk-v-arkansas-teacher-retirement-system-del-2018.