Except as otherwise provided by the Constitutions or laws of the United States or of the State of Delaware, as the same may expressly require or be interpreted as requiring by a court of competent jurisdiction, no claim or cause of action shall arise, and no judgment, damages, penalties, costs or other money entitlement shall be awarded or assessed against the State or any public officer or employee, including the members of any board, commission, conservation district or agency of the State, whether elected or appointed, and whether now or previously serving as such, in any civil suit or proceeding at law or in equity, or before any administrative tribunal, where the following elements are present:
(1) The act or omission complained of arose out of and in connection with the performance of an official duty requiring a determination of policy, the interpretation or enforcement of statutes, rules or regulations, the granting or withholding of publicly created or regulated entitlement or privilege or any other official duty involving the exercise of discretion on the part of the public officer, employee or member, or anyone over whom the public officer, employee or member shall have supervisory authority;
(2) The act or omission complained of was done in good faith and in the belief that the public interest would best be served thereby; and
(3) The act or omission complained of was done without gross or wanton negligence;
provided that the immunity of judges, the Attorney General and Deputy Attorneys General, and members of the General Assembly shall, as to all civil claims or causes of action founded upon an act or omission arising out of the performance of an official duty, be absolute; provided further that in any civil action or proceeding against the State or a public officer, employee or member of the State, the plaintiff shall have the burden of proving the absence of 1 or more of the elements of immunity as set forth in this section.
61 Del. Laws, c. 431,
§
1;
66 Del. Laws, c. 348,
§
1;
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
66
cases (
32 in the last 5 years), 1980–2026 · leading case:
Carrigan v. State of Del., 957 F. Supp. 1376 (D. Del. 1997).
Carrigan v. State of Del., 957 F. Supp. 1376 (D. Del. 1997).
· cites it 7× “Count III alleges that the Administrative Defendants and Defendant Davis failed to provide Plaintiff with secure conditions under 10 Del.Code § 4001. Count IV alleges *1380 that the policies and customs of the Administrative Defendants contributed to and/or caused the alleged…”
Thomas v. Bd. of Educ. of Brandywine Sch., 759 F. Supp. 2d 477 (D. Del. 2010).
· cites it 2× “See 10 Del. C. § 4001 et seq. In the alternative, the School District Defendants contend that the Plaintiff cannot establish a prima facie showing on any of the state law claims.”
Lloyd v. Jefferson, 53 F. Supp. 2d 643 (D. Del. 1999).
· cites it 2× “Statutory Immunity: Delaware Tort Claims Act The defendants further argue that they are entitled to statutory immunity on McCormick’s state law claims pursuant to the Delaware Tort Claims Act, 10 Del.C. § 4001 et seq. 18 “The Delaware Tort *682 Claims Act provides immunity for…”
Karl Manuel v. Atkins, 545 F. App'x 91 (3rd Cir. 2013).
“2013) (citing 10 Del. C. § 4001). 6 . The District Court treated Manuel’s negligence claim as a substantive due process claim.”
Space Age Prods., Inc. v. Gilliam, 488 F. Supp. 775 (D. Del. 1980).
“Except as otherwise provided by the Constitutions or laws of the United States or of the State, as the same may expressly require or be interpreted as requiring by a court of competent jurisdiction, no claim or cause of action shall arise, and no judgment, damages, penalties,…”
Santiago v. Fields, 170 F. Supp. 2d 453 (D. Del. 2001).
“See 10 Del. C. § 4001; see also Smith v. New Castle County Vo-Technical School District, 574 F.”
Wilson Ex Rel. Est. of Wilson v. Taylor, 597 F. Supp. 2d 451 (D. Del. 2009).
“” 10 Del. C. § 4001. Viewing the facts in the light most favorable to plaintiff, a genuine issue of material fact exists as to whether defendant McDonald acted in good faith and *461 without gross or wanton negligence.”
White v. Irwin, 114 F. Supp. 3d 174 (D. Del. 2015).
“See 10 Del. C. § 4001. While the statute does protect state employees from "liability for acts done in good faith,- without gross or wanton negligence and which arose out of and in connection with the performance of official discretionary duties,” plaintiff has alleged both bad…”
Roberts v. White, 698 F. Supp. 2d 457 (D. Del. 2010).
“See 10 Del. C. § 4001. Section 4001 exempts state employees from civil liability for their actions unless the plaintiff proves the absence of one or more of the following three elements: (1) The act or omission complained of arose out of and in connection with the performance of…”
Thompson v. Cape Henlopen Sch. Dist. (Del. Super. Ct. 2019).
· cites it 7× “Thompson, a minor, alleges that defendants’ negligent and grossly negligent actions led to Reed sustaining a severe injury to his right little finger In defendants’ motion for summary judgment, they argue that the record demonstrates that Plaintiff has failed to overcome the…”
Amalfitano v. Cocolin (Del. Super. Ct. 2017).
· cites it 6× “In addition, State Defendants assert that State Defendants are immune from liability pursuant to Section 4001 of the State Tort Claims Act (“Section 4001”)2 and Delaware‟s Authorized Emergency Vehicle 2 10 Del. C. § 4001. 3 Statute (“AEVS”)3 because there are no genuine issues…”
Laws v. Handy (Del. Super. Ct. 2017).
· cites it 4× “5 10 Del. C. § 4001. 3 A. Superior Court Civil Rules 12(b)(1) & 12(b)(6).”
— 10 Del. C. § 4001(1) — 4 cases
Laws v. Handy (Del. Super. Ct. 2017).
“5 10 Del. C. § 4001. 3 A. Superior Court Civil Rules 12(b)(1) & 12(b)(6).”
— 10 Del. C. § 4001(2) — 3 cases
Lloyd v. Jefferson, 53 F. Supp. 2d 643 (D. Del. 1999).
“Statutory Immunity: Delaware Tort Claims Act The defendants further argue that they are entitled to statutory immunity on McCormick’s state law claims pursuant to the Delaware Tort Claims Act, 10 Del.C. § 4001 et seq. 18 “The Delaware Tort *682 Claims Act provides immunity for…”
— 10 Del. C. § 4001(3) — 4 cases
— 10 Del. C. § 4001(c) — 1 case
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.