In Re: Asbestos Litigation. Harold Howton. Reed Grgich. Limited to Crane Co.
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE IN AND FOR NEW CASTLE COUNTY IN RE ASBESTOS LITIGATION: HAROLD HOWTON REED GRGICH Limited to: Crane Co. ) ) ) ) ) ) C.A. No. N11C-03-218 ASB C.A. No. N10C-12-011 ASB ORDER Defendant, Crane Co, moved for reargument for their motion for summary judgment in the above captioned case. The standard for reargument under Superior Court Civil Rule 59(e) is well settled. On a motion for reargument, the only issue is whether the court overlooked something that would have changed the outcome of the underlying decision. The Court will generally deny the motion unless a party demonstrates that the Court has overlooked a controlling precedent or principle of law, or unless the Court has misapprehended the law or facts in a manner that affects the outcome of the decision. A motion for reargument is not intended to rehash the arguments that already have been decided by the Court. 1 Defendant s motion contains arguments that are a rehash or should have been presented in earlier briefing. The Motion for Reargument is hereby, DENIED. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: April 11, 2012 oc: cc: 1 ____________________________ John A. Parkins, Jr. Superior Court Judge Prothonotary All counsel via e-file Bernhardt v. Ford Motor Co., 2010 WL 3005580, at *2 (Del. Super.) (citations and internal quotations omitted).
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
