Legal Opinion
Fell v. Zimath
Superior Court of Delaware
Decided October 17, 1989PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
TAYLOR, Judge.
Plaintiff sues for injuries resulting from a collision involving the motor vehicle in which he was riding which was driven by defendant Mark N. Zimath [Zimath]. Plaintiff alleges that Zimath was under the influence of alcohol at the time of the accident.
Defendant Maryland Casualty Company [Maryland] has asserted the defense of assumption of risk. Plaintiff has moved to strike that defense. Plaintiff’s ground for the motion is that the defense of assumption of risk is incompatible with the doctrine of comparative negligence which was enacted as (10 Del. C. § 8132)1 and which is…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Sunday v. Stratton Corp.Supreme Court of Vermont · 1978
- John Keegan v. Anchor Inns, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1979
- Frelick v. Homeopathic Hospital Ass'n of DelawareSuperior Court of Delaware · 1959
- Vargus v. Pitman Manufacturing Co.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1981
- Bib v. MerlonghiSupreme Court of Delaware · 1969
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Perez v. McConkeyTennessee Supreme Court · 1994
- Koutoufaris v. DickSupreme Court of Delaware · 1992
- Davenport v. Cotton Hope Plantation Horizontal Property RegimeSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1998
- Storm v. NSL ROCKLAND PLACE, LLCSuperior Court of Delaware · 2005
- Helm v. 206 Massachusetts Avenue, LLCSupreme Court of Delaware · 2014
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.