Gibson v. Metropolitan Group Property and Casualty Insurance Company
N16C-10-087 CLS
Del. Super. Ct.Nov 15, 2017Background
- Three-car rear-end collision on September 18, 2015 in Newark, DE: Gibson (plaintiff) lead, Higgins (middle), Doordan (rear).
- Gibson testified she felt two separate impacts from behind: a heavy first impact and a lesser second impact occurring "right away."
- Higgins and Doordan each testified that Higgins brought his vehicle to a complete, controlled stop and was then struck from behind by Doordan, which pushed Higgins into Gibson.
- Higgins moved for summary judgment arguing there is no evidence he was negligent and that both depositions establish he stopped before contacting Gibson.
- Plaintiff argued the two-impact testimony permits a jury to infer Higgins struck Gibson first; Higgins replied that her testimony alone is insufficient to create a genuine dispute of material fact.
- Court viewed record in plaintiff's favor but concluded that, on these facts, no reasonable jury could find Higgins negligent and granted Higgins summary judgment.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether a genuine issue of material fact exists on Higgins' negligence in a three-car rear-end collision | Gibson: her testimony of two distinct impacts supports a jury inference that Higgins struck her first or was otherwise negligent | Higgins: his and Doordan's testimony that he made a complete stop precludes any inference of negligence | Granted for Higgins — no genuine issue; reasonable jury could not find Higgins negligent |
| Whether testimony of two impacts alone can defeat summary judgment | Gibson: yes, two impacts create an inference of differing sequence/culpability | Higgins: no, unsupported recollection cannot overcome contrary deposition testimony | Court: two-impact testimony insufficient given consistent testimony that Higgins stopped |
Key Cases Cited
- Reid v. Hindt, 976 A.2d 125 (Del. 2009) (affirming summary judgment where record established middle driver was not negligent)
- Ebersole v. Lowengrub, 180 A.2d 467 (Del. 1962) (standard for summary judgment and view of facts in light most favorable to nonmoving party)
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, 477 U.S. 242 (U.S. 1986) (defining genuine issue of material fact standard for summary judgment)