(cleaned up) (quoting Hob Tea Room v. Miller, 89 A.2d 851, 856 (Del. 1952))). Ketler v. PFPA, LLC, 2015 WL 3540187, at *2 (Del. Super. June 3, 2015), aff'd, 132 A.3d 746 (Del. 2016). Seven Invs., 32 A.3d at 396 (quoting Corp. Prop. Assocs. 6, 817 A.2d at 779).
See e.g., Marshall v. Maryland, D. & V. Ry. Co., 112 A. 526, 527 (Del. Super. Ct. 1921). Ketler v. PFPA, LLC, 2015 WL 3540187 at *2 (Del. Super. Ct. June 3, 2015), aff'd, 132 A.3d 746 at *747 (Del. 2016). 10. Here, the Court finds it prudent to exercise its discretion and allow the record to be developed further before deciding this matter.
Further, "[t]he weight of authority, and the only Delaware decision addressing the issue, favors considering attachments to the answer . . . ." Mehta v. Mobile Posse, Inc., 2019 WL 2025231, at *2 (Del. Ch. May 8, 2019) (citing Ketler v. PFPA, LLC, 2015 WL 3540187, at *1 (Del. Super. June 3, 2015) (reviewing a document attached to the answer and finding that "[e]xhibits to pleadings are considered part of the pleadings")). Thus, this Court may review the pleadings and exhibits attached to both the Complaint and Answer when deciding this 12(c) Motion, not just those attached to the Complaint. Because DNREC attached a copy of the Public Access Easement to its Answer, the Public Access Easement is part of the pleadings and the Court will consider it to resolve this Motion.
Super. Dec. 10, 2018) ("Where a document is integral to the pleadings, the court may consider it in deciding a Rule 12(c) motion without converting it to one for summary judgment."); see also 5C Charles Alan Wright & Arthur R. Miller, Federal Practice and Procedure § 1367 (3d ed. 2019). See Mehta v. Mobile Posse, Inc., 2019 WL 2025231, at *2 (Del. Ch. May 8, 2019) (considering exhibits attached to the defendants' answer on a motion for judgment on the pleadings); Ketler v. PFPA, LLC, 2015 WL 3540187, at *1 (Del. Super. June 3, 2015) (considering document attached to answer on motion for judgment on the pleadings and noting that "[e]xhibits to pleadings are considered part of the pleadings and therefore this motion does not convert to one for summary judgment"), aff'd, 132 A.3d 746 (Del. 2016)). Delaware Rule of Evidence 201 empowers the Court to "take judicial notice at any stage of the proceeding."
Super. Dec. 10, 2018) ("Where a document is integral to the pleadings, the court may consider it in deciding a Rule 12(c) motion without converting it to one for summary judgment."); see also 5C Charles Alan Wright & Arthur R. Miller, Federal Practice and Procedure § 1367 (3d ed. 2019). See Mehta v. Mobile Posse, Inc., 2019 WL 2025231, at *2 (Del. Ch. May 8, 2019) (considering exhibits attached to the defendants' answer on a motion for judgment on the pleadings); Ketler v. PFPA, LLC, 2015 WL 3540187, at *1 (Del. Super. June 3, 2015) (considering document attached to answer on motion for judgment on the pleadings and noting that "[e]xhibits to pleadings are considered part of the pleadings and therefore this motion does not convert to one for summary judgment"), aff'd, 132 A.3d 746 (Del. 2016)). Delaware Rule of Evidence 201 empowers the Court to "take judicial notice at any stage of the proceeding."
Super. Dec. 10, 2018) ("Where a document is integral to the pleadings, the court may consider it in deciding a Rule 12(c) motion without converting it to one for summary judgment."); see also 5C Charles Alan Wright & Arthur R. Miller, Federal Practice and Procedure § 1367 (3d ed. 2019).SeeMehta v. Mobile Posse, Inc. , 2019 WL 2025231, at *2 (Del. Ch. May 8, 2019) (considering exhibits attached to the defendants' answer on a motion for judgment on the pleadings); Ketler v. PFPA, LLC , 2015 WL 3540187, at *1 (Del. Super. June 3, 2015) (considering document attached to answer on motion for judgment on the pleadings and noting that "[e]xhibits to pleadings are considered part of the pleadings and therefore this motion does not convert to one for summary judgment"), aff'd , 132 A.3d 746 (Del. 2016) ). Delaware Rule of Evidence 201 empowers the Court to "take judicial notice at any stage of the proceeding."
(citations omitted)). See Ketler v. PFPA, LLC, 2015 WL 3540187, at *1 (Del. Super. June 3, 2015) (considering document attached to answer and stating "[e]xhibits to pleadings are considered part of the pleadings and therefore this motion does not convert to one for summary judgment"), aff'd, 132 A.3d 746 (Del. 2016). Compare Barnard v. Lackawanna Cty., 696 F. App'x 59, 61 (3d Cir. 2017) ("Because the exhibits concisely set out the parties' respective rights and the record of the underlying dispute, they are 'documentary evidence' constituting 'written instruments' of the kind contemplated by Rule 10(c), and we find no error in the Court's consideration of their contents.")
Moreover, courts have found waiver of liability forms enforceable in contexts dissimilar to those listed above. See, e.g., Ketler v. PFPA, LLC, 2015 WL 3540187, at *2 (Del. Super. 2015) (finding a waiver form sufficient to invoke primary assumption of risk when the plaintiff snapped a cable on a rowing machine at the defendant's gym). The Storm Court would have had no occasion to comment on the nature of the activity if it were not independently meaningful in the analysis.