Opinions Digested in Delaware Law Weekly for the Issue of
CIVIL PRACTICE Attorney Fees Contractual Fee Shifting Provision Reasonable Amount Weichert Co. of Pennsylvania v. Young, DeFAX Case No. D63247 (Del. Ch. May 1, 2008).
Plaintiff was entitled to receive the amount of attorney fees it sought pursuant to a contractual fee-shifting provision even though plaintiff’s monetary recovery in the case was modest in comparison with the fees sought. Attorney fee application granted.
CIVIL PRACTICE Pleadings Complaint Amendment Interests of Justice NACCO Industries, Inc. v. Applica, Inc. DeFAX Case No. D63252 (Del. Ch. May 7, 2008).
Plaintiffs were entitled to amend their verified amended complaint where plaintiffs filed their motion before the due date of a brief responding to defendants’ motion to dismiss and where allowing amendment would best serve the interests of justice. Motion for leave to amend granted.
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW Licensing Real Estate License Revocation Hearing Notice Morris v. Real Estate Comm’n DeFAX Case No. D63246 (Del. Super. April 11, 2008).
Where licensee did not receive required notice of the date for the hearing on the revocation of his real estate license, licensee was entitled to reversal of the Real Estate Commission’s decision revoking his license. Reversed.
CIVIL PRACTICE Parties Defendant Dismissal Rule 41(a)(2) Motion Barrow v. Abramowicz DeFAX Case No. D63249 (Del. Super. April 17, 2008).
Due to the advanced procedural posture of the case and waste of resources, plain legal prejudice would result if plaintiff’s Rule 41(a)(2) motion to dismiss defendant-physician were granted. Motion to dismiss defendant denied.
CIVIL PRACTICE Trial Administration Motion for Reargument Motion to Reopen Record Barrow v. Abramowicz DeFAX Case No. D63248 (Del. Super. April 17, 2008).
The Superior Court denied reargument of defendant’s motion to reopen the record, finding that it had not overlooked a controlling precedent or legal principle, or misapprehended the law or facts such as would have changed the outcome of the underlying decision. Motion for reargument denied.
WORKERS’ COMPENSATION Causation Back Injury Evidence Claimant’s Credibility Tatman v. Daisy Construction DeFAX Case No. D63245 (Del. Super. April 25, 2008).
Claimant failed to prove that he suffered a work-related back injury where his testimony about causation was not credible and where timely reports prepared by employer’s witnesses supported their account of events. Affirmed.
WORKERS’ COMPENSATION Disability Total Disability Leg Fracture Unrebutted Evidence George v. All Around Design DeFAX Case No. D63250 (IAB April 7, 2008).
Claimant was entitled to compensation for a 10-week period of total disability, given the unrebutted evidence pertaining to his leg fracture, surgery and subsequent recovery time. Petition to determine compensation due granted.
WORKERS’ COMPENSATION Medical Expenses Proposed Back Surgery Medical Expert Testimony Gatts v. Voshell Brothers Welding DeFAX Case No. D63251 (IAB April 2, 2008).
In this dispute over authorization for proposed back surgery, the Industrial Accident Board accepted the opinion of employer’s medical expert over that of claimant’s expert where employer’s expert had examined claimant on more occasions and was in a better position to opine regarding claimant’s condition. Petition to determine additional compensation due denied.
|