Malcom v. Dempsey
| Decision Date | 03 December 1965 |
| Parties | , 59 Del. 174 Homer C. MALCOM, Plaintiff Below, Appellant, v. Loulse H. DEMPSEY, Defendant Below, Appellee. |
| Court | United States State Supreme Court of Delaware |
Upon appeal from denial of summary judgment by Superior Court of New Castle County. Appeal dismissed.
Julian D. Winslow, Wilmington, for plaintiff below, appellant.
George L. Sands and Carl W. Mortenson, Wilmington, for defendant below, appellee.
As may be seen from our prior decision reported at 209 A.2d 159 (1965), this case, a negligence action, was remanded to the Superior Court for new trial. It appears that, on the remand, the plaintiff attempted to obtain final disposition of the cause by summary judgment rather than by trial. The Superior Court denied the plaintiff's motion for summary judgment and ordered the case for trial.
The action of the Superior Court was correct because it was in conformity with the mandate of this Court. Moreover, the denial of summary judgment is not appealable because, as is generally the case, it neither adjudicated any legal right nor settled and substantial issue. Alexander Industries v. Hill, Del., 211 A.2d 917 (1965); Haveg Corporation et al. v. Guyer, Del., 211 A.2d 910 (1965).
The appeal is dismissed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Lawrence v. State Dept. of Health
...v. Garza, 93 Ariz. 318, 380 P.2d 778 (1963); Wilson v. Wilson, 54 Cal.2d 264, 5 Cal.Rptr. 317, 352 P.2d 725 (1960); Malcom v. Dempsey, 215 A.2d 457 (Del.1965); Croy Mfg. Co. v. Marks, 62 Ill.App.2d 373, 210 N.E.2d 814 (1965); Crum v. Anchor Cas. Co., 264 Minn. 378, 119 N.W.2d 703 (1963); Pr......
-
Cross v. Hair
...has been no adjudication of legal right or substantial issue; and the interlocutory order, therefore, is unappealable. Malcom v. Dempsey, Del.Sup., 215 A.2d 457 (1965); Haveg Corporation v. Guyer, Del.Sup., 211 A.2d 910 (1965); Alexander Industries, Inc. v. Hill, Del.Sup., 211 A.2d 917 (196......