Omniglow, LLC was owned 50% by D, 30% owned by Holland; and 20% were owned by P. In 2008 D, allegedly took sole control of Omniglow over the objection of both P and Holland, and in contravention of Omniglow's 'LLC Agreement' that vests managerial authority in the Members in proportion to their respective interests. Holland transferred his entire 30% Interest to P, and then P filed this suit on March 10, 2011, claiming that P and D are now deadlocked, 50/50, as to the management of Omniglow, and therefore an order of dissolution is warranted under 6 Del. C. § 18-802. D moved to dismiss the complaint under Rule 12(b)(6), arguing that Holland's assignment was only effective to give P an additional 30% economic interest in Omniglow in that the LLC Agreement required D's consent to the assignment because, in its view, P was in effect being readmitted as a Member with respect to its newly acquired 30% Interest.

This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.