 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Eby v. Thompson4/20/2005
Date Submitted: February 21, 2005
Dear Counsel
This is the Court's decision regarding Rental Equipment Center's request to apply Maryland law to the Plaintiffs' claims. For the following reasons, the motion is DENIED.
Rental Equipment Center (hereinafter "REC") is a Maryland corporation that rents equipment to the general public. On June 28, 2003, Allawishes Gove rented a trailer and stump grinder from the REC store in Salisbury, Maryland. Before releasing the equipment, REC required Mr. Gove to complete and authorize a written contract containing the rental terms and conditions.
The rented trailer and stump grinder were later directly involved in a motor vehicle accident in Seaford, Delaware. The accident resulted in the death and physical injuries of two Delaware residents. The Plaintiffs filed a civil action for damages arising out of the accident in the Sussex County Superior Court.
The Plaintiffs insist that the application of strict liability to a lessor, according to Delaware law, is appropriate. REC, however, requested that this Court apply Maryland law, which precludes strict liability of lessors. REC contends that Maryland law should apply since its store is located in Maryland, the rental agreement was formed in Maryland, the lease agreement requires the equipment to be used in Maryland and the contract leasing the stump grinder to Mr. Gove specifically cites the application of Maryland law.
These arguments, however, ignore the fact that the central issue and parties in this case are essentially unrelated to the equipment rental and lease agreement. If this case was a personal injury or wrongful death action by Mr. Gove, the lessee, then the contractual formation and obligations between those parties might be more relevant. But the case before the Court centers around the death of William Eby and the physical injury of Jeanette Eby, who had no connection to the rental agreement.
The only connection between the Ebys and REC is an automobile accident that occurred in Delaware. The accident did not arise out of the contract formed in Maryland nor are the Plaintiffs in this action bound by that contract. Therefore, any breach of the agreement between REC and Mr. Gove as to usage or any expectation of the applicable law established by the leasing agreement shall have minimal effect on the choice of law in this action. Instead of focusing on the contractual agreement between Mr. Gove and REC, this Court will interpret the choice of law question in relation to the automobile accident that resulted in this wrongful death and personal injury action.
In 1991, the Delaware Supreme Court adopted the "most significant relationship" test found in RESTATEMENT (SECOND) OF CONFLICTS (1971) as the appropriate standard to apply for conflict of law disputes. The state with the "most significant relationship" to the claim at issue is determined by balancing the following factors:
1. The needs of the interstate and international systems;
2. The relevant policies of the forum;
3. The relevant policies of other interested states and the relevant interests of those states in the determination of the particular issue;
4. The protection of justified expectations;
5. The basic policies underlying the particular field of law;
6. Certainty, predictability and uniformity of result; and
7. Ease of determination and application of the law to be applied.
First, as applied to this case, the needs of the interstate and international systems are not likely to be affected by the choice of law decision in this case. Th
Page 1 2 3 4 Delaware Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|