Delaware Code

12 Del. C. § 1176 (2026)

Failure of person examined to retain records

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section DE-DELCdelcode.delaware.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) If a person subject to examination under § 1171 of this title does not retain the records required by § 1145 of this title, the State Escheator may determine the amount of property due using a reasonable method of estimation based on all information available to the State Escheator, including extrapolation and the use of statistical sampling when appropriate.

(b) The Secretary of Finance, in consultation with the Secretary of State, shall, on or before December 1, 2017, adopt regulations regarding the method of estimation to create consistency in any examination or voluntary disclosure. These regulations must include permissible base periods, items to be excluded from the estimation calculation, aging criteria for outstanding and voided checks, and the definition of what constitutes complete and researchable records.

81 Del. Laws, c. 1, § 2; 81 Del. Laws, c. 48, § 5; 84 Del. Laws, c. 233, § 17;

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 2 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 2019–2022 · leading case: Univar, Inc. v. Geisenberger (D. Del. 2022).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Univar, Inc. v. Geisenberger (D. Del. 2022). · cites it 2× “12 Del. C. § 1176. The use of the term 7 It appears that the scope of the Audit may begin in 2000, although the initial inquiry seems to be dated back to 1991.”

Univar, Inc. v. Geisenberger (D. Del. 2019). “The Complaint, moreover “seeks a declaration that Delaware’s retroactive application of 12 Del. C. § 1176, as amended in July of 2010 and again on February 2, 2017, to allow the State Escheator to estimate a holder’s liability when the holder has failed to maintain adequate…”

— 12 Del. C. § 1176(a) — 1 case

Univar, Inc. v. Geisenberger (D. Del. 2022). “12 Del. C. § 1176. The use of the term 7 It appears that the scope of the Audit may begin in 2000, although the initial inquiry seems to be dated back to 1991.”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.