Opinions Digested in Delaware Law Weekly for the Issue of
EVIDENCE Expert Witnesses l D.R.E. 803(18) l Learned Treatise l Pages l Exhibits Berry v. Cardiology Consultants P.A. DeFAX Case No. D63006 (Del. Supr. en banc Oct. 2, 2007).
The trial court erred in admitting as exhibits certain pages from a learned treatise relied upon by an expert witness because D.R.E. 803(18) prohibits the admission of such pages as exhibits. Reversed and remanded for new trial.
BUSINESS LAW Mergers and Acquisitions l Merger Agreement l Breach l Damages LaPoint v. AmerisourceBergen Corp. DeFAX Case No. D63008 (Del. Ch. Sept. 4, 2007).
Plaintiffs were entitled to nominal damages of six cents as compensation for defendant’s breach of its contractual duty to
promote certain products under a merger agreement and to $21 million for an earnout payment, which was unpaid due to
defendant’s miscalculations. Judgment for plaintiffs.
BUSINESS LAW Shareholder Suit l Stock Option Backdating l Derivative Action l Demand Excusal Conrad v. Blank DeFAX Case No. D63004 (Del. Ch. Sept. 7, 2007).
Given that half of the company’s 10-member board of directors was either personally interested in the allegedly improper option grants or faced a substantial likelihood of personal liability related to those grants, plaintiff was excused from making demand before filing this derivative action. Motion to dismiss denied in part; conditionally granted in part.
MOTOR VEHICLES Automobile Insurance l Uninsured Motorist Coverage l Denial l New Jersey Law l ‘Verbal Threshold’ Whitaker v. USAA General Indemnity Co. DeFAX Case No. D63005 (Del. Super. Sept. 21, 2007).
Defendant-insurer was not entitled to summary judgment on plaintiff’s claim for uninsured motorist coverage where plaintiff’s entitlement to damages under the tortfeasor’s policy awaited resolution in a New Jersey court. Motion for summary judgment denied without prejudice; action stayed.
WORKERS’ COMPENSATION Causation l Recurrence of Back Injury l Substantial Evidence l Medical Experts Briney v. M & A Kimball Masonry DeFAX Case No. D63001 (Del. Super. Sept. 28, 2007).
Claimant was not entitled to workers’ compensation benefits because there was substantial evidence to support the Industrial Accident Board’s finding that claimant did not suffer a recurrence of his prior work-related back injury. Affirmed.
LEGAL PROFESSION Fee Disputes l Immigration Matter l Unfavorable Results Ira M. Denhoffer, P.C. v. Sutherland DeFAX Case No. D63007 (Del. Com. Pl. Sept. 28, 2007).
Under the law of New York, the parties entered into a binding contract for plaintiff’s provision of legal services for an appeal in an immigration matter, and defendant’s dissatisfaction with the results did not provide grounds for defendant to avoid the contract. Judgment for plaintiff.
WORKERS’ COMPENSATION Causation l Knee Injury l Cumulative Detrimental Effect l Medical Experts Robinson v. DaimlerChrysler DeFAX Case No. D63002 (IAB Sept. 25, 2007).
Claimant was entitled to workers’ compensation benefits where he proved that the cumulative detrimental effects of his work activities substantially caused his bilateral knee complaints. Petition to determine compensation due granted.
WORKERS’ COMPENSATION Medical Expenses l Spinal Fusion Surgery l Compensability l Medical Expert Opinions Perrine v. Steel Suppliers DeFAX Case No. D63003 (IAB Sept. 25, 2007).
Claimant was not entitled to approval for spinal fusion surgery where employer’s expert gave persuasive testimony that such surgery was not reasonable, necessary or causally related to claimant’s work accident. Petition to determine additional compensation due denied.
|