Opinions Digested in Delaware Law Weekly for the Issue of
CIVIL PRACTICE Settlement l Class Action l Objections l Bifurcated Settlement Process In re Philadelphia Stock Exchange Inc. DeFAX Case No. D63227 (Del. Supr. en banc March 27, 2008).
Objectors to the Court of Chancery’s approval of the settlement of this shareholder class action were not entitled to relief because their claims, which included an objection to the use of a bifurcated settlement approval process, lacked merit. Affirmed.
EVIDENCE Expert Witnesses l Invisible, Airborne Mold l Injuries l Causation Campbell v. DiSabatino DeFAX Case No. D63223 (Del. Supr. en banc April 23, 2008).
Defendants were entitled to summary judgment because plaintiffs failed to provide competent expert opinion that problems in the rented home were responsible for invisible, airborne mold that allegedly injured plaintiffs. Affirmed.
EVIDENCE Scientific Evidence l Testing l Allegedly Contaminated Juice Bailey v. Acme/Asco/Albertson’s, Inc. DeFAX Case No. D63222 (Del. Supr. April 23, 2008).
Plaintiff in this tort action was not entitled to use his inability to obtain defendant’s test results regarding allegedly contaminated juice as an excuse for failing to arrange for his own testing. Affirmed.
BUSINESS LAW Corporate Governance l Stockholder’s Director Nominees l Annual Meeting l Notice Levitt Corp. v. Office Depot, Inc. DeFAX Case No. D63221 (Del. Ch. April 14, 2008).
Plaintiff-stockholder was entitled to propose its nominees for election to the company’s board of directors at the annual stockholders meeting without having to give advance notice because the company had already included the business of electing directors in the notice of the meeting. Cross motions for judgment on the pleadings decided.
CIVIL PRACTICE Trial Administration l Stay l Forum Non Conveniens Considerations l Pending New York Case l Practical Considerations In re Bear Stearns Companies, Inc. DeFAX Case No. D63226 (Del. Ch. April 9, 2008).
Given the pendency of a virtually identical action previously filed in New York and given practical considerations favoring trial in New York, the Court of Chancery determined that defendants were entitled to a stay of this consolidated Delaware action. Motion to stay granted.
CIVIL PRACTICE Verdicts l JMOL l New Trial l Uninsured Motorist Coverage Salaam v. Sentry/Dairyland Ins. DeFAX Case No. D63228 (Del. Super. April 25, 2008).
Given the evidence adduced at trial regarding the vehicle-owner’s contact with her insurance agent and given the owner’s economic condition at the time of their discussion of uninsured motorist coverage, plaintiff was not entitled to judgment as a matter of law or to a new trial in this dispute over the agent’s provision of sufficient information about the cost and availability of UM coverage. Motions denied.
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW Due Process l Child Victim’s Act l Extended Statute of Limitations Whitwell v. Archmere Academy, Inc. DeFAX Case No. D63224 (Del. Super. April 16, 2008).
In this case of first impression, the Superior Court held that 10 Del. C.§ 8145, the Child Victim’s Act, which created a two-year window allowing victims of childhood sexual abuse to bring civil suits previously barred by the statute of limitations, was not unconstitutional. Motion to dismiss denied.
WORKERS’ COMPENSATION Impairment l Permanent Impairment l AMA Guides l Old Edition Murphy v. Beebe Medical Center DeFAX Case No. D63225 (IAB March 31, 2008).
The Industrial Accident Board rejected the opinion of claimant’s expert regarding claimant’s alleged permanent impairment where the expert used an old edition of the AMA Guides, applied the wrong standard for Delaware and formulated ratings that were “absurdly high.” Petition to determine additional compensation due denied.
|