Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

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

Mosaica Education, Inc. v. Academy of Dover, Inc.

Superior Court of Delaware, Kent

April 7, 2015

MOSAICA EDUCATION, INC., a Delaware corporation, Plaintiff,
v.
ACADEMY OF DOVER, INC., d/b/a ACADEMY OF DOVER CHARTER SCHOOL, Defendant.

Submitted: April 1, 2015

Upon Consideration of Garnishee's Motion to Dismiss DENIED

William W. Pepper, Sr., Esquire, Schmittinger & Rodriguez, P.A., Dover, Delaware for Plaintiff.

James D. Taylor, Jr., Esquire, and Allison J. McCowan, Esquire, Saul Ewing, LLP, Wilmington, Delaware for Defendant.

Laura L. Gerard, Esquire, Deputy Attorney General, Department of Justice, Wilmington, Delaware for the Office of the State Treasurer.

ORDER

ROBERT B. YOUNG J.

SUMMARY

Mosaica Education, Inc. ("Plaintiff") and Academy of Dover, Inc., ("Defendant") entered into a contract relating to charter school management services to be provided by Plaintiff to Defendant, a charter school operating in Delaware. At some point, relations between the two parties broke down, leading, eventually, to the award of damages against Defendant for breach of contract, ordered by an arbitrator. The Delaware Court of Chancery affirmed this award in 2010. Since that time, Plaintiff has been thwarted in its effort to satisfy this judgment.

Seeking satisfaction, Plaintiff filed a writ of garnishment directed at the Office of the State Treasurer ("Garnishee, " o r "Treasurer"). Garnishee res pond s to Plaintiff's writ by filing the present Motion to Dismiss. Citing to case law that is over one hundred years old, Garnishee contends that Delaware, by virtue of sovereign immunity, prevents the imposition of writs of garnishment upon the Treasurer. By contrast, Plaintiff points to Delaware Supreme Court authority, as well as statutory authority, which Plaintiff argues supercedes the century old prohibition against garnishment.

The Supreme Court and the Legislature have modified the original rule that the Treasurer is not subject to garnishment. Although the precise factual circumstances forming this case were not specifically identified by the Supreme Court or the Legislature, the extension of the overarching policy is a logical step. Thus, Garnishee's Motion to Dismiss is DENIED.

FACTS AND PROCEDURES

Preceding the current suit, on February 1, 2010, was a judgment for Plaintiff against Defendant in the amount of $962, 724.68, issued by the Delaware Court of Chancery. The Court of Chancery confirmed the award of an arbitrator, arising from Defendant's breach of contract. Plaintiff had been retained by Defendant, a charter school operating in Delaware, for charter management services.

Following this judgment, Plaintiff has been unable to collect the sums owed to it. As per Plaintiff, the amount due has now, given the accrued interest, risen to $2, 019, 956.30. On February 2, 2015, Plaintiff served the Treasurer with an Attachment Facias Garnishment, directing the Treasurer to satisfy the ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

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