Court lacked authority to suspend any portion of an administrative penalty order issued for violation of underground storage tank regulations, pursuant to 7 Del. C. §6005(b)(3).

The court held that plaintiff was entitled to a preliminary injunction to prevent defendant from pursuing arbitration against plaintiff where plaintiff will likely show that it never agreed to arbitrate defendant's claims.

The court held that plaintiffs' amended complaint satisfied pleading requirements for a claim of breach of fiduciary duty concerning board approval and implementation of charter amendments where 1) plaintiffs made a valid demand on the board to correct a violation and 2) the allegations supported an inference that the demand was wrongfully refused.

The court held that plaintiff failed to show that defendant engaged in contemptuous conduct constituting a violation of a previously issued court order under the preponderance of the evidence standard for contempt claims.

Where the parties' various agreements adopted different dispute resolution procedures, although each version delegated the issue of arbitrability to the arbitrator, the court could exercise subject matter jurisdiction to determine arbitrability where there was no unmistakable evidence that the parties had agreed to submit one party's claims to that party's chosen arbitral forum.

Appellate Division, First Department: September 28, 2021