Sherman v. Georgia-Pacific LLC ( 2014 )

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
TED SHERMAN, §
§ No. 98, 2014
Plaintiff Below, §
Appellant, § Court Below:
§
v. § Superior Court of the
§ State of Delaware, in and for
GEORGIA-PACIFIC LLC, § New Castle County
§
Defendant Below, § C. A. No. 11C-01-271-ASB
Appellee. §
Submitted: October 22, 2014
Decided: October 23, 2014
Before STRINE, Chief Justice, RIDGELY and VALIHURA, Justices.
ORDER
This 23rd day of October 2014, upon consideration of the record before us, it
appears to the Court that Appellant Ted Sherman (“Sherman”) raises two issues on
appeal. First, he argues that the Superior Court erred when it denied Sherman’s
motion at trial to amend his pleadings to include a breach of implied warranty
claim under Virginia law. Second, he argues that the Superior Court erred when it
did not instruct the jury concerning his negligence theory that the Appellee failed
to exercise ordinary care in the design, manufacture and sale of products, and
instead, instructed the jury solely on the theory of failure to warn.
We have carefully reviewed the complicated record below. We find that
there is evidence in the record to suggest that the Appellee would have been
prejudiced if Sherman’s requested amendments and instructions had been allowed.
Accordingly, on the record before us, we conclude that the Superior Court did not
abuse its discretion in denying Sherman’s proposed amendment and in instructing
the jury.
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
2