DE Superior Court denies motion for summary judgment seeking relief based on emergency doctrine when evidence showed driver had been awake/operating vehicle for 27 hours.

Transportation companies are often successful in utilizing emergency doctrine defenses, and this matter involved an actual “State of Emergency” due to winter weather. The defendant, a salt-truck driver, failed to stop at a red light and collided with the plaintiffs’ vehicle. The defendants moved for summary judgment, arguing that the driver’s failure to see the plaintiffs and inability to stop was merely simple negligence and liability was precluded by the emergency situation. The plaintiffs submitted evidence that the driver had been working for 27 hours without a significant break, which was conflicted by his deposition testimony that he took a five-hour break the evening of the collision. Despite the applicable emergency doctrine, the court, in denying the defendants’ motion, determined that evidence the driver was working for 27 hours straight created an issue of fact for the jury to determine—whether the failure to rest was willful and wanton conduct by the driver—warranting relief to plaintiffs. 

^{Case Law Alerts, 1st Quarter, April 2022 is prepared by Marshall Dennehey Warner Coleman & Goggin to provide information on recent developments of interest to our readers. This publication is not intended to provide legal advice for a specific situation or to create an attorney-client relationship. Copyright © 2022 Marshall Dennehey Warner Coleman & Goggin, all rights reserved. This article may not be reprinted without the express written permission of our firm.}