Palmer et al. v. Berger et al. and Ugly Duckling Corporation et al.
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE THOMAS C. PALMER and PHILLIP GOLDSTEIN, § § § Objectors Below§ Appellants, § § v. § § PAUL BERGER, BRYAN § BENTON, THOMAS TURBERG, § JOE BRECHER, DARREN § SUPRINA and DON HANKEY § LIVING TRUST (DON R. § HANKEY, TRUSTEE), § § Plaintiffs Below§ Appellees, § § and § § UGLY DUCKLING § CORPORATION, ERNEST C. § GARCIA, II, VERDE § INVESTMENTS, INC., GREGORY § B. SULLIVAN, JOHN N. § MacDONOUGH, CHRISTOPHER § D. JENNINGS, and FRANK P. § WILLEY, § § Defendants Below§ Appellees. § No. 259, 2002 Court Below-Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware, in and for New Castle County C.A. No. 18746 Submitted: July 29, 2002 Decided: August 14, 2002 Before VEASEY, Chief Justice, WALSH and STEELE, Justices ORDER This 14th day of August 2002, the Court has considered the motion to affirm of defendants-appellees Garcia, Sullivan and Verde Investments, the motion to affirm of plaintiffs-appellees Berger, Benton, Turberg, Brecher, Suprina and Don Hankey Living Trust, and the motion to affirm of defendantappellee Ugly Duckling Corporation pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 25(a) and finds it manifest on the face of the opening brief of objector-appellant Goldstein that the appeal is without merit for the reasons stated by the Court of Chancery in its well-reasoned decisions dated April 18, 2002.1 NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the motions to affirm are GRANTED. The judgment of the Court of Chancery is AFFIRMED.2 BY THE COURT: /s/ E. Norman Veasey Chief Justice 1 The Court of Chancery issued two decisions, one approving the parties settlement of the class and derivative claims and one approving the application for attorney s fees and expenses. 2 We do not reach the merits of the motion to dismiss filed by defendants-appellees MacDonough, Jennings and Willey, and in which other parties have joined.
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.
