Case Title: Bridgestone/Firestone, et al. v. Cervantes, et al.

Citation: 

Docket Number: 

State: delaware

Court: Delaware Supreme Court

Date: 2008-10-10T00:00:00Z

Document:
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE BRIDGESTONE/FIRESTONE NORTH § AMERICAN TIRE, LLC; BRIDGESTONE/ § No. 466, 2008 FIRESTONE, INC.; BRIDGESTONE/ § FIRESTONE RESEARCH, LLC; § Court Below—Superior Court BRIDGESTONE AMERICAS HOLDING, § of the State of Delaware in and INC., FIRESTONE TIRE & RUBBER § for New Castle County COMPANY and FORD MOTOR § COMPANY, § § Defendants Below, § Appellants, § § v. § § ROSA LAURA CERVANTES, § Individually and as Representative of the § Estate of ELOY TUDON HERNANDEZ, § Deceased and Next Friend of JOEL § ALEJANDRO TUDON CERVANTES, § SERGIO ORLANDO TUDON § CERVANTES, and ELROY OBED § TUDON CERVANTES, minors, § § Plaintiffs Below, § C.A. No. 07C-06-249 Appellees. § Submitted: October 9, 2008 Decided: October 10, 2008 Before STEELE, Chief Justice, HOLLAND and RIDGELY, Justices. O R D E R This 10th day of October 2008, it appears to the Court that: (1) Defendants-appellants (“Defendants”) have petitioned this Court, pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 42 (“Rule 42”), to accept an appeal from the Superior Court’s opinion dated August 14, 2008, which denied Defendants’ Motion to Apply and 2 Determine the Law of Mexico.1 By order dated October 7, 2008, the Superior Court denied Defendants’ application for certification of the interlocutory appeal. (2) Applications for interlocutory review are addressed to the sound discretion of this Court and are granted only in exceptional circumstances.2 The Court has examined the Superior Court’s August 14, 2008 opinion according to the criteria set forth in Rule 42. The Court concludes that exceptional circumstances as would merit interlocutory review of the opinion do not exist in this case. NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the interlocutory appeal is REFUSED. BY THE COURT: /s/ Myron T. Steele Chief Justice 1 Cervantes v. Bridgestone/Firestone North American Tire Co., 2008 WL 3522373 (Del. Super.). Defendants’ motion sought an application of Mexican law to a case arising out of an automobile accident in Durango, Mexico involving the rollover of a Ford Explorer equipped with a recalled Firestone tire. 2 Del. Supr. Ct. R. 42(b).