Ponzo et al. v. A.I. duPont Hospital for Children

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE VICTORIA H. PONZO, REUEL A. WILLIAMS, and DORIS A. WILLIAMS, Plaintiffs BelowAppellants, v. ALFRED I. DUPONT HOSPITAL FOR CHILDREN, WILMINGTON HOSPITAL, and LEONARD D. WILLIAMS, Defendants BelowAppellees. § § § § § § § § § § § § § § § § No. 448, 1998 Court Below Superior Court of the State of Delaware, in and for New Castle County C.A. No. 98C-04-023 Submitted: January 13, 2000 Decided: March 8, 2000 Corrected: March 20, 2000 Before VEASEY, Chief Justice, WALSH, and HOLLAND, Justices. ORDER This 20th day of March 2000, it appears to the Court that: (1) The plaintiffs-appellants, Victoria Ponzo, Reuel Williams, and Doris Williams ( the plaintiffs ), filed this appeal from decisions of the Superior Court, dated July 15, 1998 and September 17, 1998, which dismissed the plaintiffs medical malpractice, wrongful death, and personal injury claims against the defendants, A.I. duPont Hospital, Wilmington Hospital, and Leonard Williams. A.I. duPont Hospital has filed a joint motion to affirm the Superior Court's judgment on the ground that it is manifest on the face of the plaintiffs opening brief that the appeal is without merit under the criteria set forth in Supreme Court Rule 25(a). (2) We have reviewed the trial court record as well as the plaintiffs opening brief and A.I. duPont Hospital s motion to affirm. It is manifest that the plaintiffs medical malpractice, wrongful death and personal injury claims are all barred by the applicable two-year statute of limitations. See 18 Del. C. § 6856; 10 Del. C. §§ 8107, 8119. Accordingly, we conclude that this matter should be affirmed for the reasons stated in the Superior Court's wellreasoned decisions dated July 15, 1998 and September 17, 1998. NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the motion to affirm is GRANTED. The judgment of the Superior Court as to all of the appellees is hereby AFFIRMED. BY THE COURT: /s/ E. Norman Veasey Chief Justice -2-

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.