Al Jazeera America, LLC v. At&T Services, Inc., et al.
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE AL JAZEERA AMERICA, LLC, Plaintiff BelowAppellant, v. AT&T SERVICES, INC., Defendant Below, and BLOOMBERG L.P., PEG BRICKLEY, RITA FARRELL, RANDALL CHASE, KYLE WAGNER COMPTON, and SHARON BRADLEY, Objectors BelowAppellees. § § § § § § § § § § § § § § § § § § § § Nos. 562, 2013 and 600, 2013 Court Below Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware, C.A. No. 8823 Submitted: October 30, 2013 Decided: November 5, 2013 Before HOLLAND, BERGER and RIDGELY, Justices. ORDER This 5th day of November 2013, it appears to the Court that: (1) On October 16, 2013, the plaintiff-appellant, Al Jazeera America, LLC (Al Jazeera), filed a notice of appeal in No. 562, 2013 from an order of the Court of Chancery, dated October 14, 2013. In response to objections filed by various individuals on behalf of media-related organizations to Al Jazeera s filing of a redacted complaint pursuant to Court of Chancery Rule 5.1, the Court of Chancery s October 14th decision ordered Al Jazeera to file a largely unredacted version of its complaint. On October 29, Al Jazeera filed a notice of interlocutory appeal from the same order in No. 600, 2013. The Court of Chancery granted certification of the interlocutory appeal on October 22, 2013. (2) A rule to show cause was issued in No. 562, 2013 directing Al Jazeera to show cause why that appeal should not be dismissed as interlocutory. Al Jazeera s response contends that the order is appealable pursuant to the collateral order doctrine. In light of the Court of Chancery s subsequent certification of the interlocutory appeal in No. 600, 2013, we find no need to address whether the collateral order doctrine is applicable in this case. (3) In the exercise of our discretion, we have concluded that the application for interlocutory review meets the requirements of Supreme Court Rule 42(b) and should be accepted. In the interests of judicial economy, the appeal in No. 562, 2013 shall be dismissed. NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the interlocutory appeal in No. 600, 2013 shall be ACCEPTED. The appeal in No. 562, 2013 is hereby DISMISSED. BY THE COURT: s/ Randy J. Holland Justice -2-
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
