Pirestani v. Reagan
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE JOSEPH DANIEL PIRESTANI, Cross-Petitioner Below, Appellant, v. KEVIN J. REAGAN, Petitioner Below, Appellee, and ATTORNEY AD LITEM, Appellee. § § § § § § § § § § § § § § § § § § Consol. Nos. 364, 2018 & 365, 2018 Court Below—Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware C.M. No. 17950-N Submitted: January 10, 2019 Decided: February 15, 2019 Before VAUGHN, SEITZ, and TRAYNOR, Justices. ORDER The appellant, Joseph Daniel Pirestani, filed these appeals from Court of Chancery orders relating to the award of attorneys’ fees to the attorney ad litem and the continued service of the appointed guardian. Most of the arguments in the opening brief relate to the appointment of the guardian in 2016. This Court affirmed that appointment in 2017.1 Pirestani may not relitigate that decision. After careful consideration of Pirestani’s opening brief on appeal, it is clear that the judgment of the Court of Chancery should be affirmed, sua sponte under Supreme Court Rule 25(c), on the basis of the Court of Chancery’s well-reasoned orders dated August 1, 2017, November 8, 2017, January 31, 2018, June 13, 2018, July 31, 2018, and August 2, 2018 and bench ruling dated June 13, 2018. The motions filed since the opening brief are denied as moot. NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the judgment of the Court of Chancery is AFFIRMED. BY THE COURT: /s/ Collins J. Seitz, Jr. Justice 1 Pirestani v. Reagan, 2017 WL 4640137 (Del. Oct. 12, 2017). 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.
