Opinion ID: 1472466
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: The Superior Court Ruling

Text: After hearing oral argument on the motion for summary judgment, the Superior Court ruled from the bench in favor of Fontana. The trial court correctly noted that there were no material issues of fact and that the issue was purely one of law, namely the proper construction of 16 Del. C. § 6636 and its application to New Castle County Ordinance 16.02.001. [1] The Superior Court held that the plain meaning of 6636 was intentioned [ sic ] by the General Assembly to exclude evidence of any violation of smoke detectors laws set forth in Chapter 66 either as evidence coming in or as a standard of care, [2] and also determined that Section 6636 preempted the New Castle County Ordinance that was allegedly violated by the defendant's conduct. The Superior Court found that Section 6636 was intended to bar any evidence of failure to install or maintain smoke detectors in any civil action, even if such failure violated the New Castle County Code, because to allow individual counties or individual municipalities to set their own standards of care and their own criteria of admissibility ... would eviscerate the ends of the General Assembly in prohibiting `in civil suits' smoke detector non-compliance as evidence substantially or establish[ing] a standard of care. [3] To rule otherwise, the trial court explained ... would be allowing in the back door [what] the General Assembly sought to prohibit by section 6636.... The Court will not allow that. [4]