green
Positive treatment
Issue: recoupment defenseDE ↗
Issue: damages claimDE ↗
Issue: affirmative defenseDE ↗
Issue: integration clauseDE ↗
Quoted verbatim 2×
41.0 score
G Cite
cited 3× by 3 distinct cases, 2019–2023 · 2 courts ·
…set-off is a mode of defense by which the defendant acknowledges the justice of the plaintiff's demand, but sets up a defense of his own against the plaintiff, to counterbalance it either in whole or in part.
at p. 453
⚠ not in text
Treatment trajectory · 2017 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2017
2021
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 13 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
examined
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
John Halinski v. ADS Group Acquisition LLC & ADS Group OPCO LLC
(2×)
the defense of setoff arises out of an independent transaction, but the defense of recoupment goes to the reduction of the plaintiff's damages for the reason that he, himself, has not complied with the cross obligations arising under the same contract.
examined
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
Alchemy Ltd LLC v. FANchise League Company, LLC
(3×)
also: Cited as authority (rule)
the defense of set-off arises out of an independent transaction, but the defense of recoupment goes to the reduction of the plaintiff's damages for the reason that he, himself, has not complied with the cross obligations arising under the same contract.
examined
Cited as authority (rule)
Regions Bank, et al. v. Montgomery Transport Group, Inc. et al.
(3×)
also: Cited "see, e.g."
Partners, LLC v. Honeoye Lake Acquisition, LLC, 151 A.3d 450, 453 (Del. 2016). “[T]he fact that a single contract is involved does not suffice to demonstrate that the necessary transactional nexus exists” for recoupment.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
New Start Holdings, LLC v. Zi Jun Zhou
P’rs, LLC v. Honeoye Lake Acq., LLC, 151 A.3d 450, 453 (Del. 2016) (“By statute, setoff is subject to a three-year statute of limitations, and cannot be used to raise from the dead the earlier amounts.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Navient Solutions, LLC v. BPG Office Partners XIII Iron Hill LLC
(2×)
also: Cited "see, e.g."
P’rs, LLC v. Honeoye Lake Acquisition, LLC, 151 A.3d 450, 453 (Del. 2016). 231 Id. (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). 232 Id. (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). 40 The Court finds Navient failed to carry its burden to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that it is entitled to recoupment.
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Balooshi v. GVP Global Corp.
Partners, LLC v. Honeoye Lake Acquisition, LLC, 151 A.3d 450, 453 (Del. 2016) (“Setoff and recoupment are different but related defenses.
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Campbell v. Plant Health Intermediate, Inc.
Partners, LLC v. Honeoye Lake Acquisition, LLC, 151 A.3d 450, 453 (Del. 2016) (emphasis added).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
In re Happy Child World, Inc.
I have also found the Banoubs failed to prove their “set-off” counterclaims. 234 Finger Lakes Capital P’rs, LLC v. Honeoye Lake Acq., LLC, 151 A.3d 450, 453 (Del. 2016) (quoting Victor B.
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Claros Diagnostics Inc. v. OPKO Health, Inc.
Set-off and Counterclaim § 2 (2013)). 92 Finger Lakes Capital Partners, LLC v. Honeoye Lake Acquisition, LLC, 151 A.3d 450, 454 (Del. 2016). 93 883 A.2d 854 (Del.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Marion 2-Seaport Trust v. Terramar Retail Centers, LLC
(2×)
also: Cited "see, e.g."
Id. at *18. 22 Id. at *20 (citing Finger Lakes Capital P’rs, LLC v. Honeoye Lake Acq., LLC, 151 A.3d 450, 453 (Del. 2016)). 7 plaintiff’ and that ‘the claim is purely a defensive set-off and does not seek an affirmative recovery from the plaintiff.’”23 “Both the primary damages claim and a claim in recoupment must involve the same litigants.”24 (10) In this case, the Court of Chancery held that the Trust could not save its time- barred challenges as a recoupment defense “because the time-barred challenges do not arise out of the same transaction as the claims that Terramar has …
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Coit Capital Sec., LLC v. Turbine Asset Holdings, LLC
(2×)
Del. 1962). -23- contract (recoupment).'!* Valid recoupment counterclaims are not subject to statutes of limitations bars so long as the main action is timely.'” In sharp contrast, a request for declaratory relief is a claim seeking non- monetary, affirmative relief.''4 And any cross- or counterclaim for such affirmative relief must satisfy any applicable statute of limitations.''° The Court of Chancery’s decision in In re Delta & Pine Land Co. Shareholders Litigation""® is illustrative of the difference between a truly defensive counterclaim and an affirmative request for declaratory re…
examined
Cited as authority (rule)
Terramar Retail Centers, LLC v. Marion 2 Seaport Trust U/A/D/ June 21, 2002
(3×)
also: Cited "see"
A defendant cannot assert just any claim against the plaintiff as a defense; time-barred claims can only be asserted for recoupment “when they arise out of the same factually-related transaction as the plaintiff’s claim.” Finger Lakes Capital P’rs, LLC v. Honeoye Lake Acq., LLC, 151 A.3d 450, 453 (Del. 2016).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
United BioSource LLC v. Bracket Holding Corp.
Bracket has not identified any overlapping operative facts between the Superior Court action and this action, and none is apparent.48 According to its Amended Complaint, the gravamen of Bracket’s fraud claim in the Superior Court is that UBC, its parent company Express Scripts, Inc., 44 Finger Lakes Capital P’rs, LLC v. Honeoye Lake Acq., LLC, 151 A.3d 450, 454 (Del. 2016). 45 TIFD, 883 A.2d at 864 . 46 Id. at 864-65 (internal quotations omitted). 47 Opening Br. in Support of Bracket Hldg.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Jawaun SHOCKLEY, Below
v.
STATE of Delaware, Below
v.
STATE of Delaware, Below
No. 100, 2016.
Supreme Court of Delaware.
Nov 10, 2016.
Published
Court Below—Superior Court of the State of Delaware, Cr. ID No. 1410001319
GRANTED. AFFIRMED.
REMANDED.