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.
6 Delaware opinions name it 2 courts 1947–1963 0 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 |
|---|---|---|
Wright & Taylor, Inc. v. Smithgreen1 sentence1963Wright & Taylor, Inc. v. Smith, 315 S.W.2d 624, 627-628 (Ky.Ct. of App.1958) is distinguishable, since the landlord there had reserved to himself the use of the basement where the plaintiff, an employee of a tenant, was injured by catching her foot in a grease trap located in part of the. floor of the basement. | 1 | 1 |
Vattilana v. George & Lynch, Inc.green2 sentences1962He noted as the first point ( 2 Storey at p. 171 ,154 A.2d at page 567) that— “1. 1962Judge Stiftel in the recent case of Vattilana v. George & Lynch, Inc., 2 Storey 168 , 154 A.2d 565 (Super.Ct.1959) set forth these circumstances which should appear in order to apply the doctrine of res ipso loquitur. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Delaware. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Meny v. Carlson
green
2 sentences1962Despite its full opinion in Meny v. Carlson, 6 N.J. 82 , 77 A.2d 245 , 2 A.L.R.2d 1160 (Sup.Ct.1950) the present New Jersey Supreme Court did not take occasion to say or hold, 77 A.2d at page 252 , that Holmes v. Pelligrino, supra, was overruled by Mensy, so *96 I consider Holmes as effective, — especially in light of that Court’s observation that there was “no evidence in the Holmes case of what caused the plank to break”. 1962Despite its full opinion in Meny v. Carlson, 6 N.J. 82 , 77 A.2d 245 , 2 A.L.R.2d 1160 (Sup.Ct.1950) the present New Jersey Supreme Court did not take occasion to say or hold, 77 A.2d at page 252 , that Holmes v. Pelligrino, supra, was overruled by Mensy, so *96 I consider Holmes as effective, — especially in light of that Court’s observation that there was “no evidence in the Holmes case of what caused the plank to break”. | 1 | 1962–1962 |
Delaware Coach Co. v. Reynolds
green
2 sentences1961Reliance is primarily placed upon Williams v. General Baking Co., 9 Terry 104 , 98 A. 2d 779 , in which case a plaintiff was given the benefit of the doctrine as defined in Delaware Coach Co. v. Reynolds, 6 Terry 226 , 71 A. 2d 69 . 1961Reliance is primarily placed upon Williams v. General Baking Co., 9 Terry 104 , 98 A. 2d 779 , in which case a plaintiff was given the benefit of the doctrine as defined in Delaware Coach Co. v. Reynolds, 6 Terry 226 , 71 A. 2d 69 . | 1 | 1961–1961 |
Williams v. General Baking Co.
green
2 sentences1961Reliance is primarily placed upon Williams v. General Baking Co., 9 Terry 104 , 98 A. 2d 779 , in which case a plaintiff was given the benefit of the doctrine as defined in Delaware Coach Co. v. Reynolds, 6 Terry 226 , 71 A. 2d 69 . 1961Reliance is primarily placed upon Williams v. General Baking Co., 9 Terry 104 , 98 A. 2d 779 , in which case a plaintiff was given the benefit of the doctrine as defined in Delaware Coach Co. v. Reynolds, 6 Terry 226 , 71 A. 2d 69 . | 1 | 1961–1961 |
Commerce Insurance Co. v. Merrill Gas Co.
green
2 sentences1959Commerce Insurance Co. v. Merrill Gas Co., 271 Wis. 159 , 72 N. W. 2d 771 ; Vol. 2, Harper and James, The Law of Torts, § 1910, pp. 1096-1099; Prosser, Torts, (2d Ed., 1955), p. 214. 1959Commerce Insurance Co. v. Merrill Gas Co., 271 Wis. 159 , 72 N. W. 2d 771 ; Vol. 2, Harper and James, The Law of Torts, § 1910, pp. 1096-1099; Prosser, Torts, (2d Ed., 1955), p. 214. | 1 | 1959–1959 |
Biddle v. Haldas Brothers, Inc.
green
1 sentence1950As is indicated in Biddle v. Haldas Bros., supra, and the Delaware cases cited therein the doctrine of res ipso loquitur is avail tble to a plaintiff in those situations where the facts and circumsi anees surrounding the occurrence of the injury warrant the infer* nee of negligence on the part of the defendant. | 1 | 1950–1950 |
Slack v. Premier-Pabst Corp.
green
1 sentence1947It concedes, as was held in Slack v. Premier-Pabst Corp., 1 Terry (40 Del.) 97, 5 A. 2d 516 , that the rule “is not applied except where the transaction was in the exclusive management of the defendant, and all of the elements of the occurrence within his control, and the result is so unaccountable that the defendant’s negligence as a proximate cause of injury is the only fair inference to be drawn from the circumstances. ” It relies on an exception to the general rule as stated in Cooley on Torts, 4th Ed. § 498, that “a contractor, manufacturer, vendor or furnisher of an article is not liable | 1 | 1947–1947 |
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.