A Delaware court has denied a motion by AT&T Inc. to dismiss claims from two limited partners in a wireless service partnership. The court's decision allows the partners to pursue allegations that AT&T failed to properly allocate revenue and expenses, depriving them of millions in profits. This ruling is significant for the ongoing litigation involving the Oklahoma RSA 9 Limited Partnership, which is part of a larger coordinated lawsuit.
The case, formally known as In re Cellular Telephone Coordinated Partnership Litigation (Coord. C.A. No. 2022-1078-JTL), involves AT&T, which holds a majority stake in the partnership, and two other limited partners, Cherokee Telephone Company and Chickasaw Telephone Company. The plaintiffs argue that AT&T breached the partnership agreement by overcharging for services and improperly allocating expenses, which has resulted in financial losses for the partnership and its limited partners.
The dispute centers on two new legal claims added by the plaintiffs after the court previously denied AT&T's initial motion to dismiss. These claims, referred to as the New Expense Claims, allege that AT&T charged the partnership for interconnect services and spectrum leasing at rates exceeding the actual costs. The plaintiffs contend that these actions violated the terms of the partnership agreement.
The court's ruling, delivered by Vice Chancellor J. Travis Laster on July 31, 2026, allows the New Expense Claims to proceed. The court stated, "The New Expense Claims can challenge transactions effectuated within three years of the filing of the operative complaint." This means that the claims can reach back to 2019 for the interconnect claim and to 2022 for the spectrum claim. The court also noted that the plaintiffs might be able to invoke equitable tolling, which could extend the time frame for their claims.
Vice Chancellor Laster emphasized that the court must accept the plaintiffs' well-pleaded allegations as true at this stage of the proceedings. He denied AT&T's motion to dismiss both on timeliness grounds and on the merits, allowing the plaintiffs to continue their pursuit of damages for the alleged breaches of contract.
The implications of this ruling are significant for the plaintiffs, who believe they are entitled to substantial financial compensation due to AT&T's alleged mismanagement of the partnership's revenue and expenses. If successful, the plaintiffs could recover millions of dollars that they claim were wrongfully withheld from them.
This case is part of a broader trend in the telecommunications industry, where partnerships and joint ventures often face disputes over revenue sharing and expense allocation. The outcome of this litigation may set a precedent for how similar cases are handled in the future, particularly in terms of the responsibilities of general partners to their limited partners.
Looking ahead, the plaintiffs may continue to refine their claims as the case progresses through the court system. While AT&T has the option to appeal the court's ruling, the immediate focus will be on the upcoming stages of litigation, including potential discovery and further motions. The court filing did not provide details on whether there are related cases pending.
As this case unfolds, it highlights the complexities involved in partnership agreements and the importance of transparent financial practices in the telecommunications sector. Stakeholders in similar partnerships will be closely monitoring the developments in this case for insights into best practices and legal precedents.