From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

McNutt v. Delaware Racing Association

Supreme Court of Delaware
May 16, 1972
294 A.2d 838 (Del. 1972)

Opinion

May 16, 1972.

Upon appeal from Superior Court. Affirmed.

Jay H. Conner, of conner Daley, Wilmington, for plaintiffs below, appellants.

Stephen P. Casarino, of Tybout, Redfearn Schnee, Wilmington, for defendant below, appellee.

Before WOLCOTT, C.J., and CAREY and HERRMANN, JJ.


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.

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.


Summaries of

McNutt v. Delaware Racing Association

Supreme Court of Delaware
May 16, 1972
294 A.2d 838 (Del. 1972)
Case details for

McNutt v. Delaware Racing Association

Case Details

Full title:James T. McNUTT and Elsie S. McNutt, Plaintiffs Below, Appellants, v…

Court:Supreme Court of Delaware

Date published: May 16, 1972

Citations

294 A.2d 838 (Del. 1972)

Citing Cases

Chrisco v. Shafran

It was not intended to affect the statute's application to "the usual tort case in which some physical impact…

Brown v. E.I. duPont de Nemours & Co.

In appropriate circumstances, this Court has applied an exception to the limitations period by interpreting…