Opinions Digested in Delaware Law Weekly for the Issue of
CRIMINAL PRACTICE Search and Seizure l Police Conduct l Detention l 11 Del. C. § 1902 State v. Meades DeFAX Case No. D63232 (Del. Supr. en banc May 6, 2007).
Defendant was entitled to suppression of drug evidence seized from his person where the police detained defendant without reasonable grounds to suspect that he was committing, had committed or was about to commit a crime, as required by 11 Del. C. § 1902. Affirmed.
WORKERS’ COMPENSATION Attorney Fees l Huffman Claim l 19 Del. C. § 2357 l Settlement Agreement l 19 Del. C. § 2362© Ramirez v. Murdick DeFAX Case No. D63234 (Del. Supr. April 29, 2008).
Employer was not liable to claimant for liquidated damages and attorney fees under Huffman because the 30-day demand period set forth at 19 Del. C. § 2357 does not run concurrently with the 14-day period for payment of settlement agreements set forth at 19 Del. C. § 2362(c). Affirmed.
WORKERS’ COMPENSATION Attorney Fees l Settlement Prior To Hearing l Pugh Decision Baughan v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. DeFAX Case No. D63231 (Del. Supr. May 2, 2008).
In light of the recently decided Pugh v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., claimant was entitled to a reasonable attorney fee where the parties reached a settlement one day prior to the hearing scheduled before the Industrial Accident Board. Reversed and remanded.
CIVIL PRACTICE Attorney Fees l Amount l Class Action l Settlement Helaba Invest Kapitalanlagegesell-shaft mbH v. Fialkow DeFAX Case No. D63236 (Del. Ch. April 11, 2008).
Rejecting plaintiff’s counsel’s claim that they were entitled to $1.5 million in fees after settlement of this class action lawsuit, the Court of Chancery awarded counsel $500,000 in fees, plus a separate amount for expenses. Application for attorney fees and expenses granted.
TORTS Fraud l Warrantholder Inquiry l Duty to Speak l Incomplete Reply Corporate Property Assocs. 14, Inc. v. CHR Holding Corp. DeFAX Case No. D63229 (Del. Ch. April 10, 2008).
Plaintiffs stated a viable claim for fraud by nondisclosure where an employee of defendant gave a materially incomplete reply to plaintiffs’ inquiry, when defendant had no fiduciary or contractual duty to reply at all. Motion to dismiss granted in part, denied in part.
UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION Eligibility l 19 Del. C. § 3314(2) l Evidence McIntyre v. Unemployment Ins. Appeal Bd., DeFAX Case No. D63235 (Del. Super. April 29, 2008).
Claimant was not entitled to unemployment compensation benefits because 19 Del. C. § 3314(2) required that he establish that he had worked for four weeks and that he had earned four times his weekly benefit amount of $330 and claimant failed to prove that he did so. Affirmed.
WORKERS’ COMPENSATION Attorney Fees l Compensability Finding l Board’s Discretion Braddy v. State DeFAX Case No. D63233 (IAB Feb. 5, 2008).
The Industrial Accident Board had discretion to award claimant an attorney fee, given claimant’s award of compensability for her past, present and future low back pain. Motion for reargument denied.
WORKERS’ COMPENSATION Causation l Lung Disease l Workplace Toxins l Smoking Linski v. Matrix Service Industrial DeFAX Case No. D63230 (IAB March 6, 2008).
Finding the opinion offered by employer’s expert more persuasive, the Industrial Accident Board determined that claimant’s lung disease arose from his long history as a smoker rather than from alleged exposure to toxins in the workplace. Petition to determine compensation due denied.
|