In James v. National Financial LLC, No. 8931-VCL (Del. Ch. Dec. 5, 2014), the Chancery Court of Delaware granted discovery sanctions against the defendant, and in the process, outlined its view as to the proper role of Delaware counsel.  InJames, although “Delaware counsel [did] not appear to have participated in the discovery violations,” the Chancery Court imposed sanctions, observing that “Delaware counsel saw itself as a mail drop.” and “[h]ad Delaware counsel been more involved,” the discovery sanctions may have been avoided.  The court continued:  “The Court of Chancery does not recognize the role of purely ‘local counsel.’’  Thus, even in cases in which an attorney from another state is grantedpro hac vice, “Delaware counsel are expected to police the behavior of their out-of-state colleagues and ensure that out-of-state counsel understand the standards expected by Delaware courts.”  This includes playing an active role in the discovery process, “including in the collection, review and production of documents” and “at a minimum Delaware counsel should discuss with co-counsel the court’s expectations.”