Legal Opinion

Goldsberry v. Frank Clendaniel, Inc.

Superior Court of Delaware

Decided November 8, 1954No. 366, Civil Action, 1952PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Layton, J.:

Whether or not the Statute of Limitations of one year bars a third-party claim under Rule 14 presents an interesting and little discussed problem. Gray v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co., D. C., 36 F. Supp. 780 and Adam v. Vaquier, D. C., 48 F. Supp. 275, are the only authorities cited as being squarely on point. Both decisions hold that the filing of a third-party complaint is not barred by limitations. In the Gray case, a Louisiana statute provided that an action brought against one of two or more joint tort-feasors tolls the running of the Statute of Limitations as to the…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Distefano v. LambornSuperior Court of Delaware · 1951
  2. Shaw v. MegargeeSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1932
  3. Gray v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co.District Court, W.D. Louisiana · 1941

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. Alaska General Alarm, Inc. v. GrinnellAlaska Supreme Court · 2000
  2. Royal Car Wash Co. v. Mayor and Council of W.Superior Court of Delaware · 1968
  3. Di Norscia v. TibbettSuperior Court of Delaware · 1956
  4. Azarbal v. Medical Center of Delaware, Inc.District Court, D. Delaware · 1989
  5. Reddy v. PMA InsuranceSupreme Court of Delaware · 2011

9 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