Legal Opinion

Panaro v. Cullen

Supreme Court of Delaware

Decided November 1, 1962No. 46PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Terry, J.:

Plaintiffs instituted this action in the Superior Court to recover damages allegedly caused by the negligent operation of an automobile by the defendant, Elaine Cullen, on Concord Avenue, near Wilmington, at approximately 8:15 a.m. on the morning of December 3, 1959. The action of the plaintiff, Helen J. Panaro, is to recover for personal injuries. The cause of action of the plaintiff, William A. Panaro, is derivative to that of his wife, Helen J. Panaro. Defendant, Hilda Cullen, was joined as a party defendant under the provisions of 21 Del. C. §§ 6105, 6106 (Liability of parent,…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Butigan v. Yellow Cab Co.California Supreme Court · 1958
  2. Wilson v. DerricksonSupreme Court of Delaware · 1961
  3. Dietz v. MeadSupreme Court of Delaware · 1960

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Ebersole v. LowengrubSupreme Court of Delaware · 1965
  2. Rich v. DeanSupreme Court of Delaware · 1969
  3. Scullion v. HackworthSupreme Court of Delaware · 1964
  4. Dadds v. Pennsylvania RailroadSupreme Court of Delaware · 1969
  5. Staker v. McSweeneySuperior Court of Delaware · 1962

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API