Eustice v. Rupert

HORSEY, Justice:

The principal focus of this appeal of a personal injury tort claim is the sufficiency of the evidence of wanton conduct in the operation of a motor vehicle within the meaning of 21 Del.C. § 6101(a). 1 Plaintiff, William S. Eustice, injured while a passenger-guest of defendant, Jay S. Rupert, III, appeals following a jury verdict and judgment for defendant. Eustice asserts three claims of reversible error by Superior Court, all of which relate to the record evidence of defendant Rupert’s allegedly wanton conduct: (1) the Court’s denial of plaintiff’s motion for a directed…