Marquee Background
Marquee Background

Offit Kurman Blogs

Real Estate

Why Delaware Legal Opinions Matter – Part 3: A Delaware Opinion Is Not a Substitute for Local Counsel

June 18, 2026

By James A. Landon

Why Delaware Legal Opinions Matter – Part 3: A Delaware Opinion Is Not a Substitute for Local Counsel

A Delaware legal opinion serves a specific purpose: it provides opinions regarding a Delaware entity and matters governed by Delaware law. It is not intended to address every legal issue arising from a transaction, nor is it a substitute for local counsel opinions involving the laws of other states. Understanding this distinction can help avoid unnecessary opinion negotiations, reduce closing delays, and ensure that opinion requests are appropriately tailored to the role of Delaware counsel.

When a lender requires a Delaware legal opinion, it is typically because a borrower, guarantor, or other transaction party is organized and exists under Delaware law. The lender seeks assurance that the Delaware entity has been properly formed, remains in good standing, possesses the necessary power and authority to enter into the transaction, and has properly authorized the execution and delivery of the loan documents. Depending upon the scope of the engagement, Delaware opinion counsel may also provide an enforceability opinion regarding the loan documents against the Delaware entity.1 These opinions are important because Delaware law governs the internal affairs of Delaware corporations, limited liability companies, limited partnerships, and statutory trusts. Delaware counsel is uniquely positioned to analyze these issues and provide opinions concerning Delaware entity law.

One common misconception is that because a Delaware entity is involved in a transaction, Delaware counsel should be able to opine on all aspects of the deal. In reality, the scope of a Delaware opinion is generally limited to matters of Delaware law. For example, assume a Delaware limited liability company owns commercial real estate in Arizona and grants a mortgage to secure a loan. Delaware counsel may provide opinions regarding the existence, good standing, power and authority, due authorization, and, if requested, the enforceability of the loan documents against the Delaware entity.

However, Delaware counsel generally would not opine regarding:

  • The validity of the Arizona mortgage
  • General enforceability of the loan documents
  • Compliance with Arizona recording requirements
  • Perfection or priority of liens under Arizona real property law
  • Title matters affecting the property
  • State-specific licensing or regulatory requirements

Those issues are typically addressed by Arizona counsel, title companies, or other professionals familiar with Arizona law. Likewise, when collateral is located in multiple jurisdictions, local law issues may arise concerning recording statutes, fixture filings, landlord consents, or other state-specific requirements that fall outside the scope of a Delaware opinion. 

To those unfamiliar with opinion practice, the requirement for several legal opinions in a single transaction may appear duplicative. In reality, each opinion addresses a different body of law. Consider a loan transaction involving a Delaware borrower, real estate located in Texas, and loan documents governed by New York law. The lender may require a Delaware opinion concerning the borrower's existence, authority, authorization, and related Delaware law matters; a Texas opinion addressing real estate and mortgage issues; and a New York opinion regarding matters governed by New York law.

Each attorney is providing opinions within the scope of his or her jurisdictional expertise. The lender is not seeking multiple attorneys to answer the same question. Rather, the lender is assembling a comprehensive package of legal assurances covering the various legal issues presented by the transaction.

Many opinion disputes arise because the parties have different expectations regarding the scope of the Delaware opinion. Opinion requests are often copied from prior transactions without considering whether the requested opinions are appropriate for Delaware counsel. When lender's counsel, borrower's counsel, and Delaware counsel clearly understand the purpose of a Delaware opinion, the process becomes significantly more efficient. Opinion requests can be tailored appropriately, revisions can be minimized, and transactions can move toward closing with fewer delays.

A Delaware legal opinion remains a critical component of many commercial lending transactions involving Delaware entities. However, it is only one piece of a broader legal due diligence framework. Delaware counsel addresses Delaware law issues relating to the entity. Local counsel addresses issues governed by the laws of other jurisdictions. Together, these opinions provide lenders with the assurances necessary to complete complex transactions while ensuring that each opinion giver remains within the scope of their expertise.


1This is not the general enforceability of the loan documents, which is an opinion local counsel provides, it is only the enforceability as to the Delaware entity.

Categories: Real Estate

Resources

Related People

  • Posts
  • About
  • Subscribe

Firm Highlights

  • Blog Posts
    Offit Kurman Represents 1Aardvark in Acquisition by CesiumAstro
    Offit Kurman is pleased to announce its representation of 1Aardvark, LLC, a Virginia-based company specializing in mission software, advanced algorithms, and systems engineering solutions supporting national defense programs, in its acquisition by CesiumAstro Inc., a global leader in advanced space communications and intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) systems. The transaction was announced on August 18, 2026. The acquisition brings together 1Aardvark's deep expertise in mission-critical software and engineering with CesiumAstro's pioneering capabilities in space communications and ISR technologies. According to CesiumAstro, the transaction enhances its ability to deliver autonomous and resilient space systems for demanding operational environments. Offit Kurman advised 1Aardvark throughout the transaction, providing strategic legal counsel on corporate, transactional, and related matters to support the successful completion of the acquisition. Those participating in the engagement included Ryan Alexander, Gary Brackett, Robin Gilden, Pavan Mehrotra, Jim Arico and Scott Tippett. “This transaction represents a significant milestone for 1Aardvark and our team. We are deeply grateful to Ryan Alexander and the professionals at Offit Kurman for their outstanding guidance and steadfast support throughout the acquisition process,” said Ryan Kenward, President of 1Aardvark.  “Their insight, judgment, and dedication to achieving our objectives played a critical role in bringing this transaction to a successful close. We thank them for being trusted advisors every step of the way.” The acquisition underscores continued investment and consolidation within the aerospace, defense technology, and national security sectors, where software-driven capabilities and resilient space infrastructure remain increasingly important. About 1Aardvark 1Aardvark is a Virginia-based engineering and technology company specializing in mission software, algorithms, and systems engineering solutions supporting national defense missions.
  • Events
    AIA Tri-State Conference
    Princeton will serve as the backdrop for three days of connection, learning, and design leadership. From keynotes to tours to the Tri-State Design Awards, this year’s conference is designed to go far beyond education sessions. Kick off the week with pre-conference intensives and individual state component Design Award celebrations, followed by three days of education, inspiration, networking, and design excellence at the 2026 AIA Tri-State Conference—featuring pre-conference intensives, three keynote speakers, 25 education sessions, curated tours, an expo, spec academies, and the AIA Tri-State Design Awards—bringing together architects and design professionals from New Jersey, New York, and Pennsylvania to connect, learn, and celebrate the best of the profession. G2. Designing Secure Practices: Cybersecurity, Data Privacy, Contractual Provisions, and Insurance Risks for Architects (4:00 PM - 5:30 PM) Architects and design professionals increasingly rely on cloud platforms, BIM software, and digital tools to manage sensitive data, creating cybersecurity and privacy risks. A single incident can trigger liability claims, regulatory obligations, reputational harm, and insurance challenges. Yet many firms underestimate how contracts, insurance, and internal practices intersect during a breach. This program offers legal and insurance perspectives on cyber risk in architecture, examining liability exposure, risky contract provisions, and mitigation strategies. A cyber insurance expert will explain policy responses, coverage gaps, coordination with professional liability, and best practices for aligning insurance with contractual risk and protecting firms from evolving cyber threats. Learning Objectives: Identify key cybersecurity and data privacy risks faced by architecture firms and explain how these risks can impact professional liability and project outcomes. Analyze common contractual provisions to determine which clauses may increase exposure to cyber incidents and propose strategies to mitigate these risks. Evaluate the scope and limitations of cyber insurance policies, including coordination with professional liability coverage, to determine how a policy would respond in a breach scenario. Develop actionable risk management strategies by integrating legal, contractual, and insurance considerations to protect sensitive client and project data.