Faircloth v. Rash
Supreme Court of Delaware
1Per curiam
The critical question in these appeals is whether the Superior Court correctly applied the “borrowed-servant” doctrine in granting summary judgment to defendants.
The complaint is based on negligence resulting in substantial fire damage and that claim and its causal relationship to an alleged injury are ordinarily issues of fact for the jury. Cf. Collins v. F. W. Woolworth Co., Del.Supr., 295 A.2d 732 (1972); Vanaman v. Milford Memorial Hospital, Inc., Del.Supr., 272 A.2d 718 (1970); Howard v. Food Fair Stores, New Castle, Inc., Del.Supr., 7 Storey 471, 201 A.2d 638 (1964) ; and see Torrack v.…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Vanaman Ex Rel. Vanaman v. Milford Memorial Hospital, Inc.Supreme Court of Delaware · 1970
- Howard v. Food Fair Stores, New Castle, Inc.Supreme Court of Delaware · 1964
- Richardson v. John T. Hardy & Sons, Inc.Supreme Court of Delaware · 1962
- Collins v. F. W. Woolworth Co.Supreme Court of Delaware · 1972
- Torrack v. Corpamerica, Inc.Superior Court of Delaware · 1958
3Cited by10 opinions
- Lipson v. Anesthesia Services, P.A.Superior Court of Delaware · 2001
- Drejka v. Hitchens Tire Service Inc.Supreme Court of Delaware · 2010
- Johnson v. Hockessin Tractor, Inc.Supreme Court of Delaware · 1980
- Wilmington Trust Co. v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co.Supreme Court of Delaware · 1996
- McNally v. EckmanSupreme Court of Delaware · 1983
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.