Articles Posted in Delaware

This page explores Delaware settlement amounts and jury payouts. It summarizes Delaware personal injury law, including the types of cases that may be brought, the statute of limitations, and the damages that may be awarded.  It is written both for lawyers who should bookmark this page and victims who want to learn more about settlement value and personal injury law in Delaware.

Delaware Injury Verdicts and Settlements

• $190,000 Verdict (Kent County 2021): A general surgeon at Bayhealth Medical Center operated on the plaintiff to remove his cancerous thyroid gland and, in doing so, failed to remove part of the cancerous right lobe of his thyroid gland and his cancerous left lobe. The negligent surgery allowed the cancer to progress and required the plaintiff to undergo additional surgery.

In a recent malpractice opinion in Acree v. Bayhealth Med. Ctr., a Delaware Superior Court provides a ruling of interest to any Delaware medical malpractice lawyer looking to find more deep pockets that are vicariously liable for a health care provider’s care.  In this case, the focus is on a staffing agency that provided an orthopedic surgeon to a hospital.

Facts of Acree v. Bayhealth Med. Ctr.

An orthopedic surgeon performed an arthroscopic procedure on a patient’s right knee at a medical center owned by Bayhealth. Complications and a post-operative infection arose after the surgery, which, the patient alleges, will necessitate a total knee replacement.

Most jurisdictions leave the judge’s discretion whether to admit photographs from a car accident for the purpose of demonstrating the extent of the injuries of the occupants of the car. In Davis v. Maute, 770 A.2d. 36 (Del. 2001), the Supreme Court of Delaware took a minority view, holding that a party in a car accident may not directly argue that the seriousness of the injuries from an auto accident correlates to the extent of the damage to the cars, unless there is testimony from an expert witness that makes a correlation.

Accordingly, lawyers in Delaware may not argue by implication what the lawyer could not argue indirectly and attempt to suggest that the lack of property damage reflects the minor injuries.

This is great for Delaware plaintiffs’ lawyers in car accident cases who have minor property damage and claim injuries. Still, our lawyers prefer the majority rule because if you have a serious injury/serious impact case, you want to get the pictures to the jury to show the severity of the injuries and the Davis v. Maute holding can backfire on plaintiffs.