a books and records case under Vermont law, citing Thomas & Betts for the proposition that "[c]laims of mismanagement, however, must be supported by evidence"). 43 . Oscar George, Inc. v. Potts, 115 A.2d 479, 481 (Del. 1955). 44 . See Mattes v. Checkers Drive-In Restaurants, Inc., 2001 WL 337865, at *5 (Del.Ch.) (finding that “[t]he evidence at trial did not show 'a credible basis’ ” to support plaintiff’s allegations of corporate wrongdoing when the evidence represented mere curiosity and disagreement with various business decisions and where there was a "substantial delay” in the plainti 9766, at *3 (Del.Ch.) (finding "some credible basis” for an inspection pursuant to claims of corporate waste and mismanagement); Magid v. Acceptance Ins. Cos., Inc., 2001 WL 1497177, at *3 (Del.Ch.) (<HOLDING>); Dobler v. Montgomery Cellular Holding Co.,
holding that arrest took place inside home even though officers did not physically enter residence to place suspect in custody holding expert testimony remedies speculation by the court holding that discriminatory event which took place three years before was too remote holding that expert testimony provided a credible basis from which a court could infer that corporate wrongdoing took place holding expert testimony provided no evidence as to causation since testimony was not based upon reasonable medical probability