Use this button to switch between dark and light mode.

Share your feedback on this Case Opinion Preview

Thank You For Submiting Feedback!

Experience a New Era in Legal Research with Free Access to Lexis+

  • Case Opinion

In re Geneius Biotechnology, Inc.

In re Geneius Biotechnology, Inc.

Court of Chancery of Delaware

September 8, 2017, Submitted; December 8, 2017, Decided

C.A. No. 2017-0297-TMR

Opinion

MEMORANDUM OPINION

MONTGOMERY-REEVES, Vice Chancellor.

The dispute in this case arises from business management disagreements between a minority stockholder and the founder of a biotechnology start-up company. The company is in the business of developing and manufacturing T-cell therapy technology implicated in treating and curing cancer. To do this, the company needs significant upfront capital, and the parties disagree, inter alia, about the manner in which the company should seek the much needed capital. Because of their disagreements, the minority stockholder petitioned this Court to appoint a receiver under 8 Del. C. § 291, alleging that the company is insolvent and a neutral party is necessary to salvage the company's remaining value, which is its intellectual property. [*2] 

The threshold issue in this case is whether the company is insolvent, which the petitioner has the burden to prove by clear and convincing evidence. But the petitioner attempts to prove insolvency without providing any opinion or evidence of the value of the company's assets. Consequently, I hold in this post-trial opinion that the petitioner has not met its burden of proving the company's insolvency by clear and convincing evidence; thus, the petitioner's request is denied.

I. BACKGROUND

On April 18, 2017, the petitioner filed a Verified Petition for Appointment of a Receiver Pursuant to 8 Del. C. § 291 (the "Petition") and a Motion to Expedite. On April 24, 2017, I granted the petitioner's Motion to Expedite, and the respondent filed a Response to the Petition on May 10. On July 12 and 19, 2017, the parties conducted trial, followed by extensive post-trial briefing.

These are my findings of fact based on the parties' stipulations, documentary evidence, and testimony of two live witnesses during trial. I accord the evidence the weight and credibility I find it deserves.1

Read The Full CaseNot a Lexis Advance subscriber? Try it out for free.

Full case includes Shepard's, Headnotes, Legal Analytics from Lex Machina, and more.

2017 Del. Ch. LEXIS 840 *; 2017 WL 6209593

In re: GENEIUS BIOTECHNOLOGY, INC., a Delaware corporation.

Notice: THIS OPINION HAS NOT BEEN RELEASED FOR PUBLICATION. UNTIL RELEASED, IT IS SUBJECT TO REVISION OR WITHDRAWAL.

Prior History: In re Geneius Biotechnology, Inc., 2017 Del. Ch. LEXIS 572 (Del. Ch., Apr. 21, 2017)

CORE TERMS

insolvency, receiver, appoint, invoices, clear and convincing evidence, parties, obligations, stockholder, argues, burden of proof, no evidence, valuation, subsidiaries, outstanding, convinced, financing, investors, reasons, patent, funds, stock, lab

Business & Corporate Law, Dissolution & Receivership, Receiverships, Appointment of Receivers, Civil Procedure, Receivers, Evidence, Burdens of Proof, Clear & Convincing Proof