Publications
Diagnosis: Little league parent syndrome.
The mother, who had custody of children, sought to keep the father from his son’s little league games due to inappropriate and public “criticism and disparagement” of the coach’s decisions.
Case Law Alerts, 2nd Quarter, April 2017
Plaintiff not entitled to PIP benefits because vehicle was mere situs of injury when she stepped in pothole after exiting it.
The plaintiff applied for PIP benefits, alleging her injuries were within the scope of Delaware’s PIP statute.
Case Law Alerts, 2nd Quarter, April 2017
PIP insurer only required to reimburse for reasonable and necessary medical expenses. PIP insurer’s bill review rules did not constitute breach of contract or bad faith.
In consideration of the plaintiff’s medical bills submitted after an auto accident, GEICO, the plaintiff’s PIP carrier, applied a geographic reduction rule which defined a reasonable charge as one that did not exceed the 80th
Case Law Alerts, 2nd Quarter, April 2017
Admissibility of blood alcohol content evidence.
Evidence of the blood alcohol content test results of an individual involved in a motor vehicle accident is not admissible at trial absent evidence of additional conduct of the individual suggesting intoxication. The lack of any corroboratin
Case Law Alerts, 2nd Quarter, April 2017
Assumption of risk when getting into a fight.
Getting into a fight is not assuming the risk of being injured absent evidence that one had knowledge that the other individual in the fight has a weapon, or evidence of a history of the other individual being dangerous.
Case Law Alerts, 2nd Quarter, April 2017
No duty to provide sufficient parking or otherwise to protect plaintiffs against dangers arising from parking elsewhere.
Business owners do not owe a duty to provide sufficient parking on their premises or otherwise protect plaintiffs from dangers on adjoining roadways. Plaintiffs who choose to walk on public roads place themselves at risk of injury.
Case Law Alerts, 2nd Quarter, April 2017
To comply with Superior Court Rule 26(b)(4) regarding expert disclosures, party does not need formal report but does need to identify the expert, his/her opinion, and bases for opinion so opposing party has adequate notice of expected testimony.
In August 2016, the plaintiff’s counsel e-mailed defense counsel a list of topics he expected the plaintiff’s medical expert to testify about at trial.
Case Law Alerts, 2nd Quarter, April 2017
Expert testimony necessary for jury to consider whether bar stool is defective. Daubert motion granted to exclude medical expert who did not consider other injuries.
The plaintiff was injured on the defendant’s property when another person fell on top of her, apparently because the chair portion of the person’s bar stool separated from the seat portion.
Case Law Alerts, 2nd Quarter, April 2017
Evidence of plaintiff’s poverty inadmissible to prove alleged motive to falsify claim. Written expert reports are generally inadmissible at trial, but other items within reports may be admissible under the Rules.
The plaintiff, a former tenant of the defendants, claimed that he fell through a hole in their rental property. The defendants claimed he falsified his injury to receive compensation and because of the parties’ disagreements.
Case Law Alerts, 2nd Quarter, April 2017
Plaintiff entitled to jurisdictional discovery of non-resident entity only if he/she can advance plausible assertion of personal jurisdiction.
The defendant, a Chinese corporation with its principal place of business in China, sold its product to an independent distributor in China who then arranged shipment from China to some U.S. locations, not including Delaware.
Case Law Alerts, 2nd Quarter, April 2017