DiSalvo v. Financial Pacific Leasing, Inc.
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE KARL N. DISALVO, JR., Defendant Below, Appellant, v. FINANCIAL PACIFIC LEASING, INC., Plaintiff Below, Appellee. § § § § § § § § § § § § No. 146, 2017 Court Below—Superior Court of the State of Delaware C.A. No. S16C-11-020 Submitted: September 15, 2017 Decided: November 21, 2017 Before STRINE, Chief Justice; VALIHURA and TRAYNOR, Justices. ORDER This 21st day of November 2017, after careful consideration of the parties’ briefs and the record below, the judgment of the Superior Court is affirmed on the basis of and for the reasons stated in its March 31, 2017 bench ruling and April 10, 2017 order. As the Superior Court recognized at the March 31, 2017 hearing: (i) the defendant below-appellant, Karl N. DiSalvo, Jr., failed to answer the complaint and his excuses did not justify that failure;1 (ii) DiSalvo obtained a loan for the purchase of a Kenworth truck, but stopped making payments on the loan; (iii) the Vehicle 1 DiSalvo does not address this ruling on appeal. Identification Number in the financing documents matched the Vehicle Identification Number for the truck in DiSalvo’s possession; and (iv) the plaintiff below-appellee, Financial Pacific Leasing, Inc., was entitled to a writ of replevin for the truck and entry of judgment in the amount of $65,108.66. NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the judgment of the Superior Court is AFFIRMED. BY THE COURT: /s/ Leo E. Strine, Jr. 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.
