Doe 30's Mother v. Bradley
Superior Court of Delaware
1Opinion of the CourtSlights, J.
I
Notwithstanding an emerging trend to the contrary, in Delaware, a plaintiff still must establish that a defendant owed her a duty of care in order to state a prima facie claim of negligence.1 Regardless of how morally, ethically or socially deplorable a defendant’s conduct may be viewed by other constituencies, in the eyes of the law, the defendant may not be held to answer in negligence unless and until the court determines, as a matter of law, that the defendant owed a duty of care to the plain*437tiff. This is and should remain the law of Delaware.
This opinion marks the second occasion the…
2Cases cited53 opinions
- Kost v. KozakiewiczCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1993
- Brehm v. EisnerSupreme Court of Delaware · 2000
- Central Mortgage Co. v. Morgan Stanley Mortgage Capital Holdings LLCSupreme Court of Delaware · 2011
- Savor, Inc. v. FMR Corp.Supreme Court of Delaware · 2002
- Malpiede v. TownsonSupreme Court of Delaware · 2001
48 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by41 opinions
- McCants v. National Collegiate Athletic Ass'nDistrict Court, M.D. North Carolina · 2016
- Jane Doe 30's Mother v. BradleySuperior Court of Delaware · 2012
- A&D Complete Services & Landscaping, LLC v. Horsepower Property Maintenance LLCSuperior Court of Delaware · 2026
- Abdur Rahaman v. J.C. Penney Corporation, Inc.Superior Court of Delaware · 2016
- Barnes v. Hooper and Harrington Raceway, Inc. d/b/a Harrington Raceway & CasinoSupreme Court of Delaware · 2025
36 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.