Legal Opinion

Porter v. Pathfinder Services, Inc.

Supreme Court of Delaware

Decided October 8, 1996No. 48, 1996PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

HARTNETT, Justice.

Appellant Thomas Porter was injured while an employee of Appellee Pathfinder Services, Inc. He claims that the Superior Court erred when it held that the Delaware Workers’ Compensation Act provides the exclusive remedy for Porter notwithstanding that he received his pay from Casey Employment Services rather than directly from Pathfinder. We agree with the Superior Court’s grant of summary judgment dismissing Porter’s claim and, therefore, affirm.

I

The essential facts are not disputed and the parties agree that if an employment relationship existed between Porter and…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co. v. Shell Oil Co.Supreme Court of Delaware · 1985
  2. Sorenson v. Colibri Corp.Supreme Court of Rhode Island · 1994
  3. Mergenthaler v. Asbestos Corp. of AmericaSupreme Court of Delaware · 1984
  4. Lester C. Newton Trucking Company v. NealSupreme Court of Delaware · 1964
  5. Richardson v. John T. Hardy & Sons, Inc.Supreme Court of Delaware · 1962

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

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. GKN Co. v. MagnessIndiana Supreme Court · 2001
  2. New Castle County, Delaware v. National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh, PaCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1999
  3. Higgins v. WallsSuperior Court of Delaware · 2005
  4. Frank v. Hawaii Planing Mill FoundationHawaii Supreme Court · 1998
  5. Diamond Chapter 7 v. Friedman (In Re Century City Doctors Hospital, LLC)United States Bankruptcy Court, C.D. California · 2012

8 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