Opinion ID: 2308670
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Statutory Construction Net Amount of Lost Earnings

Text: The phrase [n]et amount of lost earnings is not defined by statute. This Court was first called upon to construe that phrase in United States Fidelity and Guaranty Co. v. Neighbors, Del.Supr., 421 A.2d 888 (1980). In doing so, this Court looked to the objectives of Section 2118 and interpretive case law. Id. at 889. This Court undertook a similar examination of that phrase again, in part, in Nalbone. See State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Nalbone, 569 A.2d at 72. This Court recognized in Nalbone that although Section 2118(a)(2)a.2 mandates compensation for the net amount of lost earnings, the statute provides no definition as to what earnings are or when they are lost. Id. We were cognizant, however, that in Neighbors this Court had identified the statutory objective of Section 2118 as being to enable persons who have been injured in automobile accidents to receive from their own insurance carriers the economic benefit of immediate payment without awaiting protracted litigation. United States Fidelity and Guar. Co. v. Neighbors, 421 A.2d at 890 (quoting DeVincentis v. Maryland Casualty Co., Del.Super., 325 A.2d 610, 612 (1974)). In Nalbone, this Court concluded that the statutory objective of Section 2118 could best be accomplished if the phrase [n]et amount of lost earnings was defined by determining whether the injured employee had suffered any out-of-pocket loss for which she [or he] has not received full compensation through a combination of employer benefits and PIP payments. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Nalbone, 569 A.2d at 75. Accordingly, we shall apply that same analysis in the case sub judice.