To the contrary, Doe's complaint alleged that the Officer's acts "were done in bad faith, with no belief that the public interest would be served thereby," and constituted assault, "intentionally and without [her] consent, [ ] caus[ing] [her] to be in fear of an immediate harmful or offensive contact," and battery, "intentionally and without [her] consent, [ ] mak[ing] contact in a harmful or offensive way." Compl. ¶ 5, 2010 WL 9009660, Doe v. Giddings , 2012 WL 1664234 (Del. Super. May 7, 2012).Id. ¶ 7.
Section 228 of the Restatement provides: Doe v. Giddings, C.A. No. N10C-08-178 PLA, 2012 WL 1664234, at *2 (Del. Super. May 7, 2012). Fields v. Synthetic Ropes, Inc., 59 Del. 135, 143 (Del. 1965).
However, this Court did not address the State's alternative argument that Ms. Doe's claims were barred by sovereign immunity when granting summary judgment. Doe v. Giddings, 2012 WL 1664234, *3 (Del. Super. May 7, 2012) rev'd sub nom. Doe v. State, 76 A.3d 774 (Del. 2013).
The plaintiff has now filed this application for certification of an interlocutory appeal from the Court's decision. Doe v. Giddings, 2012 WL 1664234 (Del. Super. May 7, 2012). 2. Under Delaware Supreme Court Rule 42, an interlocutory appeal will not be certified unless the trial court's order determines a substantial issue, establishes a legal right, and meets at least one of the five additional criteria set forth in Rule 42(b).