11 Delaware opinions name it 2 courts 1951–2023 1 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 |
|---|---|---|
Fisher v. Townsends, Inc.green2 sentences2017Accordingly, the Court denies (1) 27 See Fisher v. Townsends, Inc., 695 A.2d 53, 58 (Del. 1997) (stating that “if the principal is the master of an agent who is a servant, the fault of the agent, if acting within the scope of employment, will be imputed to the principal by the doctrine of respondeat superior”). 15 Defendant STTCPL’s and (2) Defendant Coastal’s motions to dismiss Mr. Duncan’s negligence claim. 2015See Restatement (Second) of Agency §§ 219 and 229 (1958) (providing that an employer is liable for an employee’s acts done within the scope of employment); Fisher v. Townsends, Inc., 695 A.2d 53, 58 (Del.1997) ("[I]f the principal is the master of an agent who is a servant, the fault of the agent, if acting within the scope of employment, will be imputed to the principal by the doctrine of respondeat superior."); Greco v. Univ. of Delaware, 619 A.2d 900, 903 (Del.1993) ("[Wjhere the alleged basis for the liability of an employer is the negligence of an employee, ‘the employer cannot be held li | 3 | 3 |
Greco v. University of Delawarered2 sentences2017If an employee, who is a licensed health care provider, is not liable to the plaintiff for medical negligence, neither is the employer.21 20 619 A.2d 900 (Del. 1993). 21 Id. at 903 . 8 In this case, Plaintiffs suggest that their claim is not a direct one of negligence against Nurse Szymanski, but rather a direct claim against AAW, thereby avoiding the respondeat superior doctrine. 2017If an employee, who is a licensed health care provider, is not liable to the plaintiff for medical negligence, neither is the employer.21 20 619 A.2d 900 (Del. 1993). 21 Id. at 903 . 8 In this case, Plaintiffs suggest that their claim is not a direct one of negligence against Nurse Szymanski, but rather a direct claim against AAW, thereby avoiding the respondeat superior doctrine. | 1 | 2 |
Maguire v. Stategreen2 sentences2018We defer, as we should, to the General Assembly, which is uniquely situated to effectively examine the empirical data, hold public hearings, debate the social and economic issues implicated, and then decide whether Delaware should recognize dram shop liability."); Justice v. Gatchell , 325 A.2d 97 , 102 (Del. 1974) ("The General Assembly has access to relevant information bearing upon these matters more significant than any afforded this Court, bound as it is by the limitations of the record of this judicial proceeding."); see also Maguire v. State , 254 Mont. 178 , 835 P.2d 755 , 759 (1992) ( 2018We defer, as we should, to the General Assembly, which is uniquely situated to effectively examine the empirical data, hold public hearings, debate the social and economic issues implicated, and then decide whether Delaware should recognize dram shop liability."); Justice v. Gatchell , 325 A.2d 97 , 102 (Del. 1974) ("The General Assembly has access to relevant information bearing upon these matters more significant than any afforded this Court, bound as it is by the limitations of the record of this judicial proceeding."); see also Maguire v. State , 254 Mont. 178 , 835 P.2d 755 , 759 (1992) ( | 1 | 1 |
Justice Ex Rel. Justice v. Gatchellgreen1 sentence2018We defer, as we should, to the General Assembly, which is uniquely situated to effectively examine the empirical data, hold public hearings, debate the social and economic issues implicated, and then decide whether Delaware should recognize dram shop liability."); Justice v. Gatchell , 325 A.2d 97 , 102 (Del. 1974) ("The General Assembly has access to relevant information bearing upon these matters more significant than any afforded this Court, bound as it is by the limitations of the record of this judicial proceeding."); see also Maguire v. State , 254 Mont. 178 , 835 P.2d 755 , 759 (1992) ( | 1 | 1 |
Mazer v. Security Insurance Groupgreen1 sentence1994Id. at 1339-40. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Delaware. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Beard Research, Inc. v. Kates
green
2 sentences2023BDO first raises an agency theory, arguing that the spoliation can be imputed to EverGlade by virtue of Jia-Sobota’s various positions at the company.128 BDO next raises a respondeat superior theory, detailing how the spoliation occurred within the scope of Jia- Sobota’s employment at EverGlade, took place on EverGlade’s technology, and had the express purpose of aiding EverGlade in this litigation.129 EverGlade urges the court to apply the respondeat superior framework,130 arguing that EverGlade is not vicariously liable for Jia-Sobota’s spoliation because his role as CEO did not include admi 2023BDO first raises an agency theory, arguing that the spoliation can be imputed to EverGlade by virtue of Jia-Sobota’s various positions at the company.128 BDO next raises a respondeat superior theory, detailing how the spoliation occurred within the scope of Jia- Sobota’s employment at EverGlade, took place on EverGlade’s technology, and had the express purpose of aiding EverGlade in this litigation.129 EverGlade urges the court to apply the respondeat superior framework,130 arguing that EverGlade is not vicariously liable for Jia-Sobota’s spoliation because his role as CEO did not include admi | 1 | 2023–2023 |
Bratton v. Calkins
green
2 sentences2018We defer, as we should, to the General Assembly, which is uniquely situated to effectively examine the empirical data, hold public hearings, debate the social and economic issues implicated, and then decide whether Delaware should recognize dram shop liability."); Justice v. Gatchell , 325 A.2d 97 , 102 (Del. 1974) ("The General Assembly has access to relevant information bearing upon these matters more significant than any afforded this Court, bound as it is by the limitations of the record of this judicial proceeding."); see also Maguire v. State , 254 Mont. 178 , 835 P.2d 755 , 759 (1992) ( 2018We defer, as we should, to the General Assembly, which is uniquely situated to effectively examine the empirical data, hold public hearings, debate the social and economic issues implicated, and then decide whether Delaware should recognize dram shop liability."); Justice v. Gatchell , 325 A.2d 97 , 102 (Del. 1974) ("The General Assembly has access to relevant information bearing upon these matters more significant than any afforded this Court, bound as it is by the limitations of the record of this judicial proceeding."); see also Maguire v. State , 254 Mont. 178 , 835 P.2d 755 , 759 (1992) ( | 1 | 2018–2018 |
Niece v. Elmview Group Home
green
1 sentence2018We defer, as we should, to the General Assembly, which is uniquely situated to effectively examine the empirical data, hold public hearings, debate the social and economic issues implicated, and then decide whether Delaware should recognize dram shop liability."); Justice v. Gatchell , 325 A.2d 97 , 102 (Del. 1974) ("The General Assembly has access to relevant information bearing upon these matters more significant than any afforded this Court, bound as it is by the limitations of the record of this judicial proceeding."); see also Maguire v. State , 254 Mont. 178 , 835 P.2d 755 , 759 (1992) ( | 1 | 2018–2018 |
Niece v. Elmview Group Home
green
1 sentence2018We defer, as we should, to the General Assembly, which is uniquely situated to effectively examine the empirical data, hold public hearings, debate the social and economic issues implicated, and then decide whether Delaware should recognize dram shop liability."); Justice v. Gatchell , 325 A.2d 97 , 102 (Del. 1974) ("The General Assembly has access to relevant information bearing upon these matters more significant than any afforded this Court, bound as it is by the limitations of the record of this judicial proceeding."); see also Maguire v. State , 254 Mont. 178 , 835 P.2d 755 , 759 (1992) ( | 1 | 2018–2018 |
Reyes v. Kent General Hospital, Inc.
green
1 sentence1993Id. | 1 | 1993–1993 |
Hallman v. Hallman
green
1 sentence1987Id. [W]e think in principle that there is no reason in law that a husband cannot commit a tort upon the person of his wife. | 1 | 1987–1987 |
Brown v. Moore
green
1 sentence1970Brown v. Moore, 247 F.2d 711 (3rd Cir.1957). | 1 | 1970–1970 |
Hobbs v. Hurley
green
2 sentences1951Hobbs v. Hurley, 117 Me. 449 , 104 A. 815 , is also cited as standing for this proposition but it involves the doctrine of respondeat superior and I feel that it should be classed as an indemnity case. 3 Despite the natural inclination to seize upon almost any acceptable excuse for departing from the harsh English rule, I am, nevertheless, of the opinion that under facts such as these, the majority rule in this country was the same as in England. 1951Hobbs v. Hurley, 117 Me. 449 , 104 A. 815 , is also cited as standing for this proposition but it involves the doctrine of respondeat superior and I feel that it should be classed as an indemnity case. 3 Despite the natural inclination to seize upon almost any acceptable excuse for departing from the harsh English rule, I am, nevertheless, of the opinion that under facts such as these, the majority rule in this country was the same as in England. | 1 | 1951–1951 |
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.