Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Wallace v. Geckosystems International Corp.

Superior Court of Delaware, Kent

September 29, 2014

NEIL WALLACE, Plaintiff,
v.
GECKOSYSTEMS INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION and R. MARTIN SPENCER, Defendants.

Submitted: July 24, 2014

Upon Consideration of Defendants' Motion for Rule to Show Cause DENIED

Decided: September 29, 2014 Neil Wallace, Pro Se.

Donald L. Gouge, Jr., Esq., Wilmington, Delaware. Attorney for Defendants.

ORDER

James T. Vaughn, Jr., President Judge

Upon consideration of the defendants' Motion for Rule to Show Cause, the plaintiff's opposition, and the record of the case, it appears that:

1. The defendants, Geckosystems International Corp. and R. Martin Smith ("defendants"), and the plaintiff, Neil Wallace ("Wallace"), agreed to a confidentiality stipulation and protective order ("Confidentiality Agreement") which was signed by this Court on February 4, 2014. The Confidentiality Agreement prohibits disclosure and use of "confidential information or documents" except for express permissible disclosures.[1]

2. On March 5, 2014, the defendants filed a Motion for a Rule to Show Cause in relation to Wallace's alleged breach of the Confidentiality Agreement. The defendants claim that Wallace began disseminating confidential information on Yahoo!Finance. Wallace counters that the defendants failed to submit any evidence that he was the author of the Yahoo!Finance messages or that information disclosed in those messages or the motion to compel disclosed any confidential information or constituted a confidential document.

3. When evaluating a rule to show cause, the applicant carries the burden of proof, "the responsibility to show by the appropriate legal standard that a violation of the court order has occurred."[2]

4. I conclude that the defendants have failed to carry their burden of demonstrating that Wallace has violated the court-ordered Confidentiality Agreement. The defendants did not demonstrate that Wallace disclosed or published any confidential information or confidential documents that would require sanctions or other remedies.

5. Therefore, the defendants' Motion for Rule to Show Cause is denied.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.