Legal Opinion

Camac v. Hall

Superior Court of Delaware

Decided October 7, 1996No. Civ. A. 93C-04-075-WTQ, 93C-08-214-WTQPublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

QUILLEN, Judge.

The question before the Court on this Motion for Summary Judgment is whether Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company is entitled to declaratory relief from the Court to the effect that its insurance policy with Donald E. Hall, Jr. does not require it to defend or indemnify him in the underlying action. For the reasons herein stated, Nationwide’s Motion is GRANTED.

I

There are two civil actions before the Court on this Motion. The first is the underlying tort action, in which Eugene Camac (“Camac”) seeks to recover compensatory damages from Donald E. Hall, Jr. (“Hall”) for an assault…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Ebersole v. LowengrubSupreme Court of Delaware · 1962
  2. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co. v. Shell Oil Co.Supreme Court of Delaware · 1985
  3. Oliver B. Cannon & Sons, Inc. v. Dorr-Oliver Inc.Superior Court of Delaware · 1973
  4. Hudson v. State Farm Mutual InsuranceSupreme Court of Delaware · 1990
  5. Sweetman v. Strescon Industries, Inc.Superior Court of Delaware · 1978

9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Nationwide Mutual Insurance v. FlaggSuperior Court of Delaware · 2001
  2. Deakyne v. Selective Insurance Co. of AmericaSuperior Court of Delaware · 1997
  3. Brosnahan Builders, Inc. v. Harleysville Mutual InsuranceDistrict Court, D. Delaware · 2001
  4. Liberty Insurance Corp. v. KornDistrict Court, D. Delaware · 2016
  5. USAA Casualty Insurance Co. v. CarrSupreme Court of Delaware · 2020

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API