Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
16 Delaware opinions name it 3 courts 1950–2026 3 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Delaware courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
In Re U.S. West, Inc. Securities Litigationgreen2 sentences2022Litig., 201 F. Supp. 2d 302 , 309 n.1 (D. 2022Litig., 201 F. Supp. 2d 302 , 309 n.1 (D. | 2 | 2 |
United States v. Scott David Steelgreen1 sentence2020See, e.g., U.S. v. Steel, 759 F.2d 706, 712 (9th Cir. 1985). 12 (21) In the end, this mistake does not affect the soundness of the Superior Court’s ultimate conclusion, because the Hearing Officer was permitted to consider hearsay so long as his decision did not rest entirely on it. (22) Husbands also argues that the Board committed legal error because the Hearing Officer did not make credibility determinations of the testifying mothers. | 1 | 1 |
Lynch v. Vickers Energy Corporationgreen1 sentence2013The passage in the Court of Chancery decision that described the duty of disclosure owed by a controlling stockholder equated it with the “same standards of fiduciary duty which directors must observe in their relations with all their stockholders.” 351 A.2d at 573 (emphasis added). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Delaware. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Erie Insurance Exchange v. Virgin Islands Enterprises, Inc.
green
1 sentence2026Exch., 264 F. Supp. 2d at 265 . 133 Dreaded, Inc. v. St. | 1 | 2026–2026 |
Lynch v. Vickers Energy Corp.
green
1 sentence2013Professor Hamermesh has argued that in Lynch v. Vickers Energy Corp., 383 A.2d 278 (Del.1977), the Delaware Supreme Court reversed course and adopted the minority rule. | 1 | 2013–2013 |
Brannigan v. Usitalo
green
2 sentences1995Appellants cite Brannigan v. Usitalo, 134 N.H. 50 , 587 A.2d 1232 (1991) and Trujillo v. City of Albuquerque, 110 N.M. 621 , 798 P.2d 571 (1990). 1995Appellants cite Brannigan v. Usitalo, 134 N.H. 50 , 587 A.2d 1232 (1991) and Trujillo v. City of Albuquerque, 110 N.M. 621 , 798 P.2d 571 (1990). | 1 | 1995–1995 |
Trujillo v. City of Albuquerque
green
2 sentences1995Appellants cite Brannigan v. Usitalo, 134 N.H. 50 , 587 A.2d 1232 (1991) and Trujillo v. City of Albuquerque, 110 N.M. 621 , 798 P.2d 571 (1990). 1995Appellants cite Brannigan v. Usitalo, 134 N.H. 50 , 587 A.2d 1232 (1991) and Trujillo v. City of Albuquerque, 110 N.M. 621 , 798 P.2d 571 (1990). | 1 | 1995–1995 |
Sterling v. Mayflower Hotel Corp.
green
1 sentence1981Rather, it stated that under the rule of Sterling v. Mayflower Hotel Corp., Del.Supr., 93 A.2d 107 (1952), the merger transaction must still be examined for entire fairness. | 1 | 1981–1981 |
Eudaily v. Harmon Ex Rel. Harmon
green
1 sentence1981The Delaware Supreme Court in Eudaily v. Harmon, Del. *511 Supr., 420 A.2d 1175 (1980) discussed the true meaning of Monaeelli v. Grimes and concluded that Monaeelli merely held that the procedure for service of process which was set forth in the amendatory statute denied the defendant a substantive right guaranteed under the constitutional principle of due process and that it did not align Delaware with the minority of States which bar the application of a statute to a cause of action which predated the statute. | 1 | 1981–1981 |
Singer v. Magnavox Co.
red
1 sentence1978Next, in the recent case of Singer v. Magnavox Company, Del.Supr., 380 A.2d 969 (1977), the Supreme Court of Delaware held: “By analogy, if not a fortiori, use of corporate power solely to eliminate the minority is a violation of that [fiduciary] duty. | 1 | 1978–1978 |
Dill v. Superior Court
green
2 sentences1978In view of the corresponding rule of In re Dill, 60 Wash.2d 148 , 372 P.2d 541 (1972) that a person adjudicated incompetent cannot sue or be sued without the appointment of a guardian the majority rule gives judgments an important measure of certainty.” (matter in brackets added). 1978In view of the corresponding rule of In re Dill, 60 Wash.2d 148 , 372 P.2d 541 (1972) that a person adjudicated incompetent cannot sue or be sued without the appointment of a guardian the majority rule gives judgments an important measure of certainty.” (matter in brackets added). | 1 | 1978–1978 |
Terrell v. State
green
2 sentences1977This is the minority rule, first enunciated in Brott v. State, 70 Neb. 395 , 97 N.W. 593 (1903). 3 See generally Terrell v. State, 3 Md.App. 340 , 239 A.2d 128 (1968); Annot., 18 A.L.R.3d 1221 (1968). 1977This is the minority rule, first enunciated in Brott v. State, 70 Neb. 395 , 97 N.W. 593 (1903). 3 See generally Terrell v. State, 3 Md.App. 340 , 239 A.2d 128 (1968); Annot., 18 A.L.R.3d 1221 (1968). | 1 | 1977–1977 |
Brott v. State
green
2 sentences1977This is the minority rule, first enunciated in Brott v. State, 70 Neb. 395 , 97 N.W. 593 (1903). 3 See generally Terrell v. State, 3 Md.App. 340 , 239 A.2d 128 (1968); Annot., 18 A.L.R.3d 1221 (1968). 1977This is the minority rule, first enunciated in Brott v. State, 70 Neb. 395 , 97 N.W. 593 (1903). 3 See generally Terrell v. State, 3 Md.App. 340 , 239 A.2d 128 (1968); Annot., 18 A.L.R.3d 1221 (1968). | 1 | 1977–1977 |
Cohen v. Bartgis Bros.
green
1 sentence1965Co., 264 App. Div. 260 , 35 N. Y. | 1 | 1965–1965 |
Levitt v. SIMCO SALES SERVICE OF PENNA
green
1 sentence1958Harr. 246, 151 A. 822 , 825, the Court stated “the wrongful act of the negligent person is single and indivisible and can give rise to but one liability.” That language, said Judge Carey of this Court, in the case of Levitt v. Simco Sales Service of Penn., 11 Terry 557 , 135 A. 2d 910 , “bespeaks agreement with the majority [rule], rather than the minority rule, in that it places the emphasis upon the tortious act rather than upon the type of injuries resulting therefrom.” *242 The cause of action in the present case is single and indivisible. | 1 | 1958–1958 |
Levitt v. Simco Sales Service of Penna., Inc.
green
1 sentence1958Harr. 246, 151 A. 822 , 825, the Court stated “the wrongful act of the negligent person is single and indivisible and can give rise to but one liability.” That language, said Judge Carey of this Court, in the case of Levitt v. Simco Sales Service of Penn., 11 Terry 557 , 135 A. 2d 910 , “bespeaks agreement with the majority [rule], rather than the minority rule, in that it places the emphasis upon the tortious act rather than upon the type of injuries resulting therefrom.” *242 The cause of action in the present case is single and indivisible. | 1 | 1958–1958 |
Coca Cola Co. v. Pepsi-Cola Co.
green
2 sentences1957In the third place, the primary reason for the rule against allowing a litigant to retry issues already decided, towit, public policy, is certainly as impressive today as it was when Coca Cola Co. v. Pepsi Cola Co., 6 W.W.Harr. 124 , 172 A. 260 , was determined; our crowded Court calendars suggest the desirability of continuing, rather than relaxing, the policy of forbidding two suits where one will suffice. 1957In the third place, the primary reason for the rule against allowing a litigant to retry issues already decided, towit, public policy, is certainly as impressive today as it was when Coca Cola Co. v. Pepsi Cola Co., 6 W.W.Harr. 124 , 172 A. 260 , was determined; our crowded Court calendars suggest the desirability of continuing, rather than relaxing, the policy of forbidding two suits where one will suffice. | 1 | 1957–1957 |
Commonwealth v. Drum
green
1 sentence1955See the following cases: Commonwealth v. Drum, 58 Pa. 9 ; *122 Commonwealth v. Brown, 17 Pa. Dist. | 1 | 1955–1955 |
Aldrich v. City of Youngstown
green
2 sentences1950R. 131, later expressly overruled by the same Court in Aldrich v. City of Youngstown, 106 Ohio St. 342 , 140 N. E. 164 , 27 A. L. 1950R. 131, later expressly overruled by the same Court in Aldrich v. City of Youngstown, 106 Ohio St. 342 , 140 N. E. 164 , 27 A. L. | 1 | 1950–1950 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.