McNutt v. Delaware Racing Association

294 A.2d 838, 1972 Del. LEXIS 284
Supreme Court of Delaware·Decided May 16, 1972·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

This is an appeal from summary judgment for the defendant in an action for damages sustained by the plaintiff as a result of a fall on the defendant’s premises. The fall occurred in 1966; the action was brought in 1970. The limitations period was two years. 10 Del.C. § 8118.

We agree with the Superior Court’s conclusion that this action is barred by the Statute of Limitations.

*839 The plaintiff contends that because one doctor told her in 1966 that she was fully-recovered, the period of limitations did not commence to run until another doctor advised her in 1968 that her then-current complaints resulted from the fall. To support this contention, the plaintiff relies upon Layton v. Allen, Del.Supr., 246 A.2d 794 (1968).

The reliance is misplaced. The exceptional limitations rule of Layton, a medical malpractice case in which the plaintiff did not know for seven years that a hemostat had been left in her body after surgery, does not apply to the usual tort case where, as here, the plaintiff knew of the wrongful act or omission at the time of its occurrence.

We do not reach the release issue.

Affirmed.

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

McNutt v. Delaware Racing Association, 294 A.2d 838, 1972 Del. LEXIS 284 (Del. 1972).

294 A.2d 838 (McNutt v. Delaware Racing Association) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

In Re: Occidental Chemical Litigation
Superior Court of Delaware, 2026
Johnson v. May and Miller-Leach
Superior Court of Delaware, 2026
Brown v. EI Dupont De Nemours & Co., Inc.
820 A.2d 362 (Supreme Court of Delaware, 2003)
Chrisco v. Shafran
525 F. Supp. 613 (D. Delaware, 1981)
Pearson v. Boines
386 A.2d 651 (Supreme Court of Delaware, 1978)