Case Title: Delaware Department of Insurance v. American Insurance Association

Citation: 

Docket Number: 571, 2007

State: delaware

Court: Delaware Supreme Court

Date: 2007-11-06T00:00:00Z

Document:
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE 
 
DELAWARE DEPARTMENT OF 
§ 
INSURANCE, 
 
 
 
§ 
No. 571, 2007 
 
 
 
 
 
 
§ 
 
Defendant Below,  
 
§ 
Court Below—Superior Court  
 
Appellant,  
 
 
§ 
of the State of Delaware in and 
 
 
 
 
 
 
§ 
for New Castle County 
 
v. 
 
 
 
 
§ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
§ 
The AMERICAN INSURANCE 
§ 
ASSOCIATION and the PROPERTY § 
AND CASUALTY INSURERS 
 
§ 
ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA,  
§ 
C.A. No. 05C-10-309 
INC.  
 
 
 
 
§ 
 
 
 
 
 
Submitted: November 2, 2007  
 
 
 
 
 
 
Decided: 
November 6, 2007 
 
Before STEELE, Chief Justice, JACOBS and RIDGELY, Justices. 
 
O R D E R 
 
 
This 6th day of November 2007, upon consideration of the notice of 
interlocutory appeal and the supplemental notice of interlocutory appeal, it 
appears to the Court that: 
 
(1) 
This interlocutory appeal arises from a Superior Court 
complaint for declaratory judgment that was filed by The American 
Insurance Association and the Property and Casualty Insurers Association of 
America, Inc. (AIA/CIAA).  In the underlying case, the Delaware 
Department of Insurance (DDI) sought to dismiss the complaint on the basis 
that AIA/CIAA lacked standing to bring the action for declaratory judgment.  
 
2
By order dated October 3, 2007, the Superior Court determined that 
AIA/CIAA had standing to seek declaratory judgment.  In disposing of the 
standing issue, the Superior Court modified and effectively rendered moot 
an earlier ruling that had permitted DDI to take discovery related to 
AIA/CIAA’s standing. 
 
(2) 
DDI petitioned this Court to accept an interlocutory appeal 
from the Superior Court’s October 3, 2007 order.  By order dated November 
1, 2007, the Superior Court denied DDI’s application for certification of an 
interlocutory appeal.1  DDI’s supplemental notice of appeal followed.2 
 
(3) 
Applications for interlocutory review are addressed to the 
sound discretion of this Court.3  The Court concludes, in the exercise of 
discretion, that the Superior Court’s October 3, 2007 order does not fit the 
requirements and criteria for accepting an interlocutory appeal.4 
 
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the 
interlocutory appeal is REFUSED. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
BY THE COURT: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
/s/ Henry duPont Ridgely 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Justice 
 
                                                 
1 Del. Supr. Ct. R. 42(c). 
2 Del. Supr. Ct. R. 42(d)(iii). 
3 Del. Supr. Ct. R. 42(d)(v). 
4 Del. Supr. Ct. R. 42(b).