Opinion
C.A. No. N11C-03-218 ASB C.A. No. N10C-12-011 ASB
04-11-2012
IN RE ASBESTOS LITIGATION: HAROLD HOWTON REED GRGICH Limited to: Crane Co.
ORDER
Defendant, Crane Co, moved for reargument for their motion for summary judgment in the above captioned case. The standard for reargument under Superior Court Civil Rule 59(e) is well settled.
On a motion for reargument, the only issue is whether the court overlooked something that would have changed the outcome of the underlying decision. The Court will generally deny the motion unless a party demonstrates that the Court has overlooked a controlling precedent or principle of law, or unless the Court has misapprehended the law or facts in a manner that affects the outcome of the decision. A motion for reargument is not intended to rehash the arguments that already have been decided by the Court.Defendant's motion contains arguments that are a rehash or should have been presented in earlier briefing. The Motion for Reargument is hereby, DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
______________________
John A. Parkins, Jr.
Superior Court Judge
oc: Prothonotary
cc: All counsel via e-file
Bernhardt v. Ford Motor Co., 2010 WL 3005580, at *2 (Del. Super.) (citations and internal quotations omitted).