Frank v. Kempczynski

Superior Court of Delaware

Frank v. Kempczynski

71 A.2d 428, 45 Del. 258, 6 Terry 258, 1950 Del. Super. LEXIS 126

CourtSuperior Court of Delaware

DecidedFebruary 8, 1950

DocketCivil Action No. 9

StatusPublished

This text of 71 A.2d 428 (Frank v. Kempczynski) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Superior Court of Delaware primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Frank v. Kempczynski, 71 A.2d 428, 45 Del. 258, 6 Terry 258, 1950 Del. Super. LEXIS 126 (Del. Ct. App. 1950).

Pincite

Opinion

Layton, Judge.

Plaintiff has stated her items of special damage with reasonable certainty. She has broken them down into hospital bills, doctor’s bills, drugs, loss of wages, board and lodging, etc. This is all that Rule 9 (g) requires. What defendaht is seeking is an itemization of the various items of plaintiff’s claim for special damages. Such a result would compel the statement of special damages to be drawn out in greater detail than formerly required by the rules of Common Law pleading prior to the adoption of the new rules of this Court. The Discovery Rules provide other means by which defendant may obtain such highly detailed information.

Motion is denied.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Layton, Judge.

Plaintiff has stated her items of special damage with reasonable certainty. She has broken them down into hospital bills, doctor’s bills, drugs, loss of wages, board and lodging, etc. This is all that Rule 9 (g) requires. What defendaht is seeking is an itemization of the various items of plaintiff’s claim for special damages. Such a result would compel the statement of special damages to be drawn out in greater detail than formerly required by the rules of Common Law pleading prior to the adoption of the new rules of this Court. The Discovery Rules provide other means by which defendant may obtain such highly detailed information.

Motion is denied.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

71 A.2d 428, 45 Del. 258, 6 Terry 258, 1950 Del. Super. LEXIS 126, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/frank-v-kempczynski-delsuperct-1950.