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.
10 Delaware opinions name it 3 courts 2015–2025 6 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 |
|---|---|---|
Burtch v. Seaport Capital, LLC (In re Direct Response Media, Inc.)green2 sentences2021J., at 17. 109 Id. at 19 (citing In re Direct Response Media, Inc., 466 B.R. 626, 654 (Bankr. 2021First, Nomis Bay hasn’t actually received a benefit.169 Though Savant believes that Nomis Bay is set to receive “70% of the spoils,”170 future judgments 164 Id. 165 Pike Creek Recreational Servs., LLC v. New Castle Cty., 238 A.3d 208 , 213 (Del. | 1 | 2 |
Ruby Clark v. American Broadcasting Companies, Inc.green1 sentence2025Cir. 1980) (emphasizing an objective three-part test), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 898 (1980); Carr v. Forbes, Inc., 259 F.3d 273, 280 (4th Cir. 2001) (announcing a five-factor test), cert. denied, 535 U.S. 988 (2002); Clark v. American Broadcasting Cos., 684 F.2d 1208, 1218 (6th Cir. 1982) (announcing a three-factor test), cert. denied, 460 U.S. 1040 (1983); Lerman v. Flynt Distributing Co., Inc., 745 F.2d 123, 136-37 (2d Cir. 1984) (announcing a four-part test), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1054 (1985). 112 627 F.2d 1287 (D.C. | 1 | 1 |
Jackie Collins Lerman v. Flynt Distributing Co., Inc.green1 sentence2025Cir. 1980) (emphasizing an objective three-part test), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 898 (1980); Carr v. Forbes, Inc., 259 F.3d 273, 280 (4th Cir. 2001) (announcing a five-factor test), cert. denied, 535 U.S. 988 (2002); Clark v. American Broadcasting Cos., 684 F.2d 1208, 1218 (6th Cir. 1982) (announcing a three-factor test), cert. denied, 460 U.S. 1040 (1983); Lerman v. Flynt Distributing Co., Inc., 745 F.2d 123, 136-37 (2d Cir. 1984) (announcing a four-part test), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1054 (1985). 112 627 F.2d 1287 (D.C. | 1 | 1 |
Richard Lloyd Carr v. Forbes, Incorporated Matthew Schifrin John Doesgreen1 sentence2025Cir. 1980) (emphasizing an objective three-part test), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 898 (1980); Carr v. Forbes, Inc., 259 F.3d 273, 280 (4th Cir. 2001) (announcing a five-factor test), cert. denied, 535 U.S. 988 (2002); Clark v. American Broadcasting Cos., 684 F.2d 1208, 1218 (6th Cir. 1982) (announcing a three-factor test), cert. denied, 460 U.S. 1040 (1983); Lerman v. Flynt Distributing Co., Inc., 745 F.2d 123, 136-37 (2d Cir. 1984) (announcing a four-part test), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1054 (1985). 112 627 F.2d 1287 (D.C. | 1 | 1 |
J.L. v. Barnesgreen1 sentence2019Furthermore, when considering whether to dismiss (or stay) an action for claim splitting, Delaware courts apply a three-factor test developed in Mc Wane Cast lron Pz'pe Corp. v. McDowell- Wellman Engz'neering Co. 331 “( 1) is there a prior action pending elsewhere; (2) in a court capable of doing prompt and complete justice; (3) involving the same parties and the same issues‘?”39 In the instant case, dismissal of 36 J.L. v. Barnes, 33 A.3d 902, 918 (Dei. super. | 1 | 1 |
Baker v. Stategreen2 sentences2016“If defense counsel raised a timely and pertinent objection to prosecutorial misconduct at trial . . . we essentially review for ‘harmless error.’”9 Under the harmless error analysis, we first conduct a de novo review of the record and determine if misconduct occurred.10 If we determine there was no misconduct, the analysis ends.11 However, if we determine that there was misconduct, we then determine whether the defendant’s substantial rights were prejudicially affected by the misconduct.12 “Only improper comments or conduct that 9 Baker v. State, 906 A.2d 139, 148 (Del. 2006). 10 Id. 11 Id. 1 2016“If defense counsel raised a timely and pertinent objection to prosecutorial misconduct at trial . . . we essentially review for ‘harmless error.’”9 Under the harmless error analysis, we first conduct a de novo review of the record and determine if misconduct occurred.10 If we determine there was no misconduct, the analysis ends.11 However, if we determine that there was misconduct, we then determine whether the defendant’s substantial rights were prejudicially affected by the misconduct.12 “Only improper comments or conduct that 9 Baker v. State, 906 A.2d 139, 148 (Del. 2006). 10 Id. 11 Id. 1 | 1 | 1 |
cluster 333191green1 sentence2015See, e.g., Com. of Pa. v. Rizzo, 530 F.2d 501 , 506 (3d Cir. Shawe v. Elting, et al. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Delaware. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Valentin v. State
green
2 sentences2021Analysis “When we review an alleged discovery violation, we must first determine whether a violation occurred.”56 “If we conclude that a discovery violation occurred, then we apply 54 Op. Br. at 15. 55 Id. at 16. 56 Valentin v. State, 74 A.3d 645 , 648–49 (Del. 2013) (stating also that, “[w]e review a trial judge’s interpretation of the Superior Court Rules of Criminal Procedure relating to discovery de novo, and we review the trial judge’s application of those Rules under an abuse of discretion standard.”). 11 a three-factor test that considers ‘(1) the centrality of the error to the case; (2 2017In these situations, this Court i) reviews the Superior Court’s application of the Superior Court Rules of Criminal Procedure for an abuse of discretion, and, if the Rules were misapplied or an abuse of discretion occurred, ii) applies "a three-factor test that considers '(1) the centrality of the error to the case; (2) the closeness of the case; and (3) the steps taken to mitigate the results of the error.' ” Id. at 649 (quoting Oliver, 60 A.3d at 1096-97 ). | 2 | 2017–2021 |
Raleigh Et Ux. v. Trischan
green
1 sentence2025Cir. 1980) (emphasizing an objective three-part test), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 898 (1980); Carr v. Forbes, Inc., 259 F.3d 273, 280 (4th Cir. 2001) (announcing a five-factor test), cert. denied, 535 U.S. 988 (2002); Clark v. American Broadcasting Cos., 684 F.2d 1208, 1218 (6th Cir. 1982) (announcing a three-factor test), cert. denied, 460 U.S. 1040 (1983); Lerman v. Flynt Distributing Co., Inc., 745 F.2d 123, 136-37 (2d Cir. 1984) (announcing a four-part test), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1054 (1985). 112 627 F.2d 1287 (D.C. | 1 | 2025–2025 |
Eric Waldbaum v. Fairchild Publications, Inc
green
2 sentences2025Cir. 1980) (emphasizing an objective three-part test), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 898 (1980); Carr v. Forbes, Inc., 259 F.3d 273, 280 (4th Cir. 2001) (announcing a five-factor test), cert. denied, 535 U.S. 988 (2002); Clark v. American Broadcasting Cos., 684 F.2d 1208, 1218 (6th Cir. 1982) (announcing a three-factor test), cert. denied, 460 U.S. 1040 (1983); Lerman v. Flynt Distributing Co., Inc., 745 F.2d 123, 136-37 (2d Cir. 1984) (announcing a four-part test), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1054 (1985). 112 627 F.2d 1287 (D.C. 2025Cir. 1980). 113 Id. at 1296 . 114 Id. at 1297 . 74 influence the outcome or could realistically have been expected, because of his position in the controversy, to have an impact on its resolution.”115 When conducting this analysis, the court can consider the plaintiff’s past conduct, the extent of press coverage, and the public reaction to his conduct and statements. | 1 | 2025–2025 |
Complete Auto Transit, Inc. v. Reis
green
1 sentence2025Cir. 1980) (emphasizing an objective three-part test), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 898 (1980); Carr v. Forbes, Inc., 259 F.3d 273, 280 (4th Cir. 2001) (announcing a five-factor test), cert. denied, 535 U.S. 988 (2002); Clark v. American Broadcasting Cos., 684 F.2d 1208, 1218 (6th Cir. 1982) (announcing a three-factor test), cert. denied, 460 U.S. 1040 (1983); Lerman v. Flynt Distributing Co., Inc., 745 F.2d 123, 136-37 (2d Cir. 1984) (announcing a four-part test), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1054 (1985). 112 627 F.2d 1287 (D.C. | 1 | 2025–2025 |
Becton v. Detroit Terminal of Consolidated Freightways
green
1 sentence2025Cir. 1980) (emphasizing an objective three-part test), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 898 (1980); Carr v. Forbes, Inc., 259 F.3d 273, 280 (4th Cir. 2001) (announcing a five-factor test), cert. denied, 535 U.S. 988 (2002); Clark v. American Broadcasting Cos., 684 F.2d 1208, 1218 (6th Cir. 1982) (announcing a three-factor test), cert. denied, 460 U.S. 1040 (1983); Lerman v. Flynt Distributing Co., Inc., 745 F.2d 123, 136-37 (2d Cir. 1984) (announcing a four-part test), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1054 (1985). 112 627 F.2d 1287 (D.C. | 1 | 2025–2025 |
Greenfield v. Wood
green
1 sentence2025Cir. 1980) (emphasizing an objective three-part test), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 898 (1980); Carr v. Forbes, Inc., 259 F.3d 273, 280 (4th Cir. 2001) (announcing a five-factor test), cert. denied, 535 U.S. 988 (2002); Clark v. American Broadcasting Cos., 684 F.2d 1208, 1218 (6th Cir. 1982) (announcing a three-factor test), cert. denied, 460 U.S. 1040 (1983); Lerman v. Flynt Distributing Co., Inc., 745 F.2d 123, 136-37 (2d Cir. 1984) (announcing a four-part test), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1054 (1985). 112 627 F.2d 1287 (D.C. | 1 | 2025–2025 |
Baldi v. Lynch (In Re McCook Metals, L.L.C.)
green
1 sentence2023One year after McCook was issued, the Northern District of Illinois opined that: “The problem with McCook and the few other decisions authorizing this sort of status-based recovery is that they ignore the fundamental nature of corporations. . . . [A] corporation is a legal entity separate from its shareholders, officers, and directors.”151 In another decision, the court observed that because McCook “does not define ‘control,’” it 147 Pls.’ Answering Br. 34. 148 319 B.R. 570 (N.D. | 1 | 2023–2023 |
Total Holdings USA, Inc. v. Curran Composites, Inc.
green
1 sentence2021USA, Inc. v. Curran Composites, Inc., 999 A.2d 873 , 885 n.39 (Del. | 1 | 2021–2021 |
Oliver v. State
green
2 sentences2017In these situations, this Court i) reviews the Superior Court’s application of the Superior Court Rules of Criminal Procedure for an abuse of discretion, and, if the Rules were misapplied or an abuse of discretion occurred, ii) applies "a three-factor test that considers '(1) the centrality of the error to the case; (2) the closeness of the case; and (3) the steps taken to mitigate the results of the error.' ” Id. at 649 (quoting Oliver, 60 A.3d at 1096-97 ). 2017"We will reverse a conviction on the basis of a discovery violation only if the defendant’s substantial rights are 'preju-dicially affected.’” Id. (quoting Oliver, 60 A.3d at 1097 ). 24 . | 1 | 2017–2017 |
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.