Cobb v. Halko.
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE IN AND FOR NEW CASTLE COUNTY LINDA K. COBB, as Guardian Ad Litem for : her minor daughter, JACLYN K. COBB, Plaintiff, v. : : : : : : C.A. No. 99C-01-213 SCD MARITA HALKO, Ind. and as Guardian Ad : Litem of her minor son, KARL T. HALKO, : and, KARL T. HALKO, Ind. : Defendants. : : ORDER DENYING LEAVE TO APPEAL FROM INTERLOCUTORY ORDER This 4th day of September, 2001, the defendant's application for certification of interlocutory appeal, and the plaintiff's response thereto having been considered, it appears: 1. That the defendant seeks to appeal from this Court's denial of the motion for summary judgment on the grounds that the Court's decision is contrary to established law. 2. That the decision to apply the "time of discovery rule" to a claim of sexual molestation of a minor, allegedly occurring when the child was between two and three and a half years of age, is not contrary to established law. The previously decided Delaware cases which considered the application of the statute of limitations to claims of child sexual abuse. Garcia v. Nekarda, Del. Supr., C.A. No. 92C-06-008, Steele, J. (February 19, 1993) and Warner v. University of Delaware, Del. Super., C.A. No. 94C-07-104, Babiarz, J. (October 2, 1993), are distinguishable on their facts. In both instances the fact of the abuse had been communicated to others within the limitations period. Neither stands for the proposition that the claim accrues Civil Action No. 99C-01-213 SCD September 4, 2001 Page Two before "the plaintiff knows, or in the exercise of reasonable care should have known both the fact of the injury and its cause." Callahan v. State of Iowa, Iowa Supr., 464 N.W. 2d 268, 273 (1990). The requirements not having been met, the application for interlocutory appeal is DENIED. IT IS SO ORDERED. _______________________________________ Judge Susan C. Del Pesco Original to Prothonotary xc: Joseph J. Rhoades, Esquire Michael I. Silverman, Esquire
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.
