Pearson v. Thomas, et al.
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
SUPERIOR COURT of the State of Delaware Kent County Courthouse 38 The Green Dover, Delaware 19901 Telephone (302) 739-5332 William L. Witham, Jr. Resident Judge July 15, 2005 James J. Woods, Jr., Esquire Sullivan & Woods, LLC 5305 Limestone Road Suite 200 Wilmington, Delaware 19808 RE: I. Barry Guerke, Esquire Parkowski, Guerke & Swayze, P.A. 116 West Water Street P.O. Box 598 Dover, Delaware 19903 Pearson v. Thomas C.A. No. 02C-09-028 WLW Gentlemen: Hilton Bus Service, Inc. has filed a motion requesting reconsideration and/or reargument on its motion for summary judgment contending that no evidence exists rebutting Deborah Herrmann s affidavit concerning notice. For the reasons set forth below, Hilton Bus Service s motion for reargument will be denied. A motion for reargument is the appropriate method for requesting the Court to reconsider its finding of facts or conclusions of law. 1 While such motion affords the Court an opportunity to correct erroneous findings of fact or conclusions of law prior to an appeal, a motion for reargument will only be granted when the Court has overlooked a controlling legal principle or has misapprehended the law or facts such as would have changed the outcome of the underlying decision.2 1 Beatty v. Smedley, 2003 Del. Super. LEXIS 437, at *5. 2 Id. Pearson v. Thomas July 15, 2005 Page 2 This Court does not believe that it has overlooked any controlling legal principle or has misapprehended the law or facts of this case that would have changed the outcome of Hilton Bus Service s motion for summary judgment. Determining whether Hilton Bus Service received fair and sufficient notice of these proceedings in compliance with Superior Court Civil Rule 15 was indeed arduous. However, after careful consideration of the unique relationship between Hilton Bus Service and J & J Bus Service, the manner in which service was performed on J & J Bus Service through Hilton Bus Service, and the circumstances under which this accident is alleged to have occurred, this Court is satisfied that Hilton Bus Service received the requisite notice on or about September 30, 2002. Accordingly, Hilton Bus Service s motion for reargument and/or reconsideration is hereby denied. IT IS SO ORDERED /s/ William L.Witham, Jr. Resident Judge WLW/dmh oc: Prothonotary xc: Counsel
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.
