Agilent Technologies v. Delpizzo
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE AGILENT TECHNOLOGIES and HEWLETT PACKARD CO., Appellees BelowAppellants, v. ALBERT DELPIZZO, Appellant BelowAppellee. § § § § § § § § § § § § Nos. 549/550, 2004 (Consolidated) Court Below Superior Court of the State of Delaware, in and for New Castle County C.A. No. 03A-07-005 Submitted: February 14, 2005 Decided: March 10, 2005 Before STEELE, Chief Justice, HOLLAND and BERGER, Justices. ORDER This 10th day of March 2005, upon consideration of the appellee s motions to dismiss and the appellants respective responses thereto, it appears to the Court that: (1) The appellants filed separate appeals from an order of the Superior Court, which reversed a decision of the Industrial Accident Board ( IAB ) and remanded the matter for a hearing on the merits of the appellee s petition for compensation due. The appellee has filed separate motions to dismiss each appeal on the ground that the appeals are interlocutory and that neither appellant has complied with Supreme Court Rule 42 in seeking to appeal the Superior Court s interlocutory order. (2) The appellants each filed a response in opposition to the appellee s motions to dismiss. After carefully considering the parties respective positions, we have concluded that the appeal must be dismissed. The Superior Court s order reversing the IAB s decision, which dismissed DelPizzo s petition for lack of jurisdiction, and remanding the case for further action is clearly interlocutory, and appellants have made no attempt to comply with Supreme Court Rule 42. The further action required by the IAB is more than ministerial in nature.1 It requires the IAB to decide DelPizzo s claim and fashion an appropriate final judgment on the merits of the petition.2 NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the motions to dismiss are GRANTED. The within appeals hereby are DISMISSED.3 BY THE COURT: /s/ Randy J. Holland Justice 1 Pollard v. The Placers, Inc., 692 A.2d 879, 880-81 (Del. 1997). 2 Mountaire Farms, Inc. v. Showell, 2003 WL 728558 (Del. Feb. 28, 2003). 3 In the event that either of the appellants files another appeal in this same proceeding, this Court s fee will be waived. 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.
