William A. Johnson v. Larry S. Miller

CourtCourt of Chancery of Delaware
DecidedJuly 19, 2024
DocketCA No. 2024-0533-SG
StatusPublished

This text of William A. Johnson v. Larry S. Miller (William A. Johnson v. Larry S. Miller) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Chancery of Delaware primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
William A. Johnson v. Larry S. Miller, (Del. Ct. App. 2024).

Opinion

COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE SAM GLASSCOCK III STATE OF DELAWARE COURT OF CHANCERY COURTHOUSE VICE CHANCELLOR 34 THE CIRCLE GEORGETOWN, DELAWARE 19947

Date Submitted: July 19,2024 Date Decided: July 19, 2024

Scott G. Wilcox, Esq. Michael F. McGroerty, Esq. GIORDANO, DELCOLLO, WERB & 110 North Pine Street GAGNE, LLC Seaford, Delaware 19973 1007 North Orange Street, Suite 437 Wilmington, Delaware 19801 Larry S. Miller 30193 Mount Joy Road Millsboro, Delaware 19966

Lakota E. Miller 30193 Mount Joy Road Millsboro, Delaware 19966

Re: William A. Johnson, et al. v. Larry S. Miller, et al., C.A. No. 2024-0533-SG

Dear Counsel and Litigants:

The parties came before me today on Plaintiffs’ motion for a temporary

restraining order requiring Defendants to not interfere with Plaintiffs’ use of the

existing Smiling Wolf Lane. This brief letter order will memorialize my bench

ruling. After examining the record and hearing argument, I determined that

Plaintiffs have a colorable claim to use Smiling Wolf Lane until a roadway over the

existing easement can be laid out and cleared. The parcels that are served by Smiling

Wolf Lane are landlocked; thus loss of ingress and egress would result in irreparable harm to the occupants of those parcels. I find that a balancing of the equities favors

Plaintiffs.

Accordingly, I am entering an order directing that Defendants not interfere

with Plaintiffs’ use of Smiling Wolf Lane, pending a trial on the merits, which will

be completed on an expedited basis. Plaintiffs shall use Smiling Lane Wolf for

egress and ingress only, maintaining a safe and reasonable speed. I find that the

restraining order does not require a bond.

To the extent the foregoing requires an Order to take effect, IT IS SO

ORDERED.

Sincerely,

/s/ Sam Glasscock III Vice Chancellor

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
William A. Johnson v. Larry S. Miller, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/william-a-johnson-v-larry-s-miller-delch-2024.