Title: Moffitt-Ali v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co.
Citation: N/A
Docket Number: 215, 2016
State: Delaware
Issuer: Delaware Supreme Court
Date: November 9, 2016

1 
 
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE 
 
  
SHANNON MOFFITT-ALI, 
 
§ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
§ 
No. 215, 2016 
 
 
Plaintiff Below, 
 
§ 
 
 
Appellant, 
 
 
§ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
§ 
Court Below:  
v. 
 
 
 
 
§ 
 
 
 
 
§ 
Superior Court of the 
STATE FARM MUTUAL   
 
§ 
State of Delaware 
AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE 
 
§ 
COMPANY, a foreign corporation, 
§ 
C.A. No. N14C-04-117 
JAVONA Y. MOFFITT-ALI, 
 
§ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
§ 
 
 
Defendants Below,  
§ 
 
 
 
Appellees. 
 
 
§ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Submitted:   November 2, 2016 
Decided:   
November 9, 2016 
 
Before STRINE, Chief Justice, HOLLAND and VALIHURA, Justices. 
O R D E R 
 
This 9th day of November 2016, the Court, having considered this matter on the 
briefs of the parties, has concluded that the same should be affirmed on the basis of and 
for the reasons assigned by the Superior Court in its decision of March 31, 2016.1 
                                                          
 
1 On appeal, Moffitt-Ali argues that the Superior Court erred in determining the issue of whether 
underinsured motorist coverage was triggered pursuant to 18 Del. C. §3902(b)(2) without 
making a factual determination as to whether the two drivers involved in the collision in which 
she was injured were tortfeasors.  The parties stipulated after oral argument on State Farm’s 
motion for summary judgment that “the only remaining issue will be the legality of the 
[d]efendant State Farm’s legal argument set forth in prior pleadings.”  Stipulated Order, Moffitt-
Ali v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., No. N14C-04-117 (Del. Super. Jan. 13, 2016).  
Accordingly, Moffitt-Ali’s argument that an issue of fact remained is waived for the purpose of 
appeal.  See Del. Supr. Ct. R. 8.  Because Moffitt-Ali has neither argued nor demonstrated plain 
error on the part of the Superior Court, we decline to consider the argument for the first time on 
appeal. 
2 
 
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the judgment of the 
Superior Court be, and the same hereby is, AFFIRMED. 
BY THE COURT: 
 
/s/ Karen L. Valihura 
Justice