Stephen P. Casarino recently prevailed in a Supreme Court appeal regarding a motor vehicle accident. In the underlying case, the defendant made an offer of judgment of $125,000 which the plaintiff refused. After a jury returned a verdict for $38,000, the plaintiff moved for a new trial or additur which were denied. On appeal, the Delaware Supreme Court affirmed the judgment below.

In another case, Mr. Casarino recently obtained a defense verdict on behalf of his client in a large condominium fire case where the plaintiff sought to recover over $680,000 in claimed damages. A co-defendant settled prior to trial.

In the United States District Court for the District of Delaware, in a case that spanned nearly a decade, Beth Christman, recently obtained a defense verdict for her client.

Matthew OByrne in a case involving claims of permanent injury and special damages obtained a verdict for his client well below a $7,500 offer of judgment and claimed out of pocket medical expenses.

Sarah Cole has had four defense verdicts in the last year. In an underinsured motorist case, the plaintiff sought to recover over $70,000 in medical bills. After a two day jury trial, the jury returned a verdict of zero. In another case, the jury decided that the accident was not the proximate cause of the plaintiffs injuries.

Casarino Christman Shalk Ransom & Doss, P.A. has recently been retained to represent one or more creditors in Avoidance, Preference or other Adversary Proceedings in the following Bankruptcies filed in the United State Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware:

In re: Ascendia Brands, Inc., et al., Debtors; Ascendia Brands, Inc., et al., Debtors in Possession, Plaintiffs (representation of creditor/defendant in alleged preference and avoidance action)

In re: Carolina Fluid Handling Intermediate Holding Corp., et al., Debtors; Alfred Giuliano, Chapter 7 Trustee, Plaintiff (creditor defense in alleged preference action)

In re: SemCrude, L.P., et al., Debtors; Bettina M. Whyte, as the Litigation Trustee of the SemGroup Litigation Trust, Plaintiff (creditor defense in alleged preference and avoidance actions)

In re: Sierra Concrete Design, Inc., Trevi Architectural, Inc., Debtors; Jeoffrey L. Burtch, Chapter 7 Trustee, Plaintiff (creditor defense in alleged preference action)

In re: Verasun Energy Corporation, et al., Debtors; Verasun Energy Corporation, et al., Plaintiffs (defense of creditor/defendants in alleged preference actions)

In re AbitibiBowater, Inc., et al., Reorganized Debtors; AbiBow US Inc., Plaintiff (creditor defense in alleged preference action)

In re: MPC Computers, LLC, et al., Debtors; The Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors of MPC Computers, LLC, et al., Plaintiff (creditor defense in alleged preference and avoidance actions)

In re: WL Homes, LLC, et al., Debtors; George L. Miller, Chapter 7 Trustee for the Estate of WL Homes, LLC, et al., Plaintiff (representation of creditor/defendant in alleged preference and avoidance action)

The firm successfully argued on appeal to the Delaware Supreme Court that a lower court's decision refusing to modify a restitution order in 2002 was illegal, resulting in a reversal of the lower court's decision. In Moore v. State, the defendant pleaded guilty to two charges and agreed to pay restitution to three individuals to be determined at a later date. Before restitution was ordered, the defendant was discharged successfully from probation without any restitution. Nonetheless, without any notice or hearing, the Superior Court ordered restitution to not only one of parties to whom he agreed to pay initially but also to two insurance companies, a medical treatment provider, and the state collection agency, parties to whom the defendant never agreed to pay restitution. After the defendant learned of the restitution order nearly 6.5 years later, he challenged the restitution order as illegal. The Superior Court denied the request. On appeal, the Supreme Court reversed and agreed with the defendant's argument that the order was improper because it exceeded the Superior Court's jurisdiction and violated the defendant's due process rights.

The Delaware Law Related Education Center recently presented Casarino Christman Shalk Ransom & Doss, P.A. with The Board of Trustees Award for the firm's dedicated and consistent support of the Delaware High School Mock Trial competition and various other educational programs.

In a recent decision involving a case of first impression in Delaware, Thomas Leff obtained a ruling that the opposing party must pay a reasonable fee for an expert's preparation time for deposition as well as for time spent in the deposition itself. The case is Reid v. Johnston, 2009 WL 4654598 (Del. Super. Dec. 3, 2009).

Don Ransom, the firm's lead bankruptcy attorney, recently earned a Finance and Accounting Certificate from the University of Pennsylvania Wharton School of Business. The program is a one year course of study in Accounting, Economics and Corporate Finance.

The firm recently argued and won an appeal in the Supreme Court of Delaware. In the case Mandarano v. Harleysville Mutual Insurance Company, No. 370, 2009 (Del. Nov. 12, 2009), the Court addressed whether an insurer breached its duty to defend an insured under a commercial insurance policy. In the underlying action, a tenant sued his landlord for breach of contract after a fire damaged the premises. The tenant sued his landlord, the insured, for breach of contract of a lease but did not allege negligence because the two-year statute of limitations for property damage actions had run. The landlord thereafter tendered the lawsuit to his insurer for a defense, and the insurer declined to defend the landlord under the policy. The Superior Court of the State of Delaware ruled in favor of the insurer and held that the allegations for breach of contract did not trigger a duty to defend the landlord because there was no coverage or assumed contractual liability at issue. The Supreme Court affirmed for the reasons set forth in the Superior Court's May 29, 2009 Opinion and Order.