Primestone Investment Partners L. P. v. Vornado PS, LLC and Vornado Realty, L.P., et al.
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE PRIMESTONE INVESTMENT PARTNERS L.P., a Delaware limited partnership, Defendant/CounterClaimant Below, Appellant, v. VORNADO PS, L.L.C., a Delaware limited partnership, Plaintiff/Counterclaim Defendant Below, Appellee, and VORNADO REALTY, L.P., a Delaware limited partnership, and VORNADO REALTY TRUST, a New York corporation, Third Party Counterclaim Defendants Below, Appellees. § § § § § § § § § § § § § § § § § § § § § § § § § § § § No. 30, 2003 Court Below: Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware in and for New Castle County C.A. No. 19264 Submitted: April 15, 2003 Decided: April 16, 2003 Before VEASEY, Chief Justice, BERGER and STEELE, Justices. ORDER This 16th day of April, 2003, having considered this matter after oral argument and on the briefs of the parties, the Court concludes that the same should be affirmed on the basis of and for the reasons assigned by the Court of Chancery in its order dated December 19, 2002. With respect to appellant s claim under Court of Chancery Rule 56(f), although the trial court did not expressly address the request for additional discovery, we find no abuse of discretion in denying the request since the court had already allowed appellant additional discovery, and the witnesses appellant sought to depose were known to appellant long before it filed its second Rule 56(f) affidavit. NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the judgment of the Court of Chancery be and the same hereby is AFFIRMED. BY THE COURT: /s/ Carolyn Berger 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.
