Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Sheets v. Quality Assured, Inc.

Superior Court of Delaware, New Castle

September 30, 2014

CRAIG SHEETS, Plaintiff,
v.
QUALITY ASSURED, Inc., d/b/a SERVICE MASTER OF BRANDYWINE VALLEY, Inc., Defendant,

Submitted: June 9, 2014

Upon Consideration of Defendant's Motion For Judgment on the Pleadings, DENIED

Kevin William Gibson, Esquire, Gibson & Perkins PC, Wilmington, DE, Attorney for Plaintiff.

Joseph Scott Shannon, Esquire, and Artemio C. Aranilla Jr., Esquire, Marshall Dennehey Warner Coleman & Goggin, Wilmington, DE, Attorneys for Defendant.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Vivian L. Medinilla Judge

I. INTRODUCTION

This action, brought by Plaintiffs Craig and Valerie Sheets ("Plaintiffs"), arises from a series of allegedly negligent events that began when Waterseal, Inc. ("Waterseal") applied mold and mildew retardant to their home. Defendant Quality Assured, Inc. ("Defendant") was hired by Plaintiffs' homeowner's insurance to remediate the effects of the original Waterseal application. Alleging that Defendant's remediation efforts were negligent, plaintiffs filed suit.[1] The parties entered into settlement negotiations. Plaintiffs allege that the parties reached a settlement on all claims, and brought suit to seek enforcement of said agreement. In response, Defendant asserts that the alleged settlement agreement is unenforceable as a matter of law and moves for Judgment on the Pleadings. Because it is necessary to look outside the pleadings to resolve disputed issues in this case, the motion is DENIED.

II. FACTUAL AND PROCEDUAL BACKGROUND

In January 2006, Waterseal applied waterproofing to Plaintiffs' home in an allegedly negligent manner. Waterseal's insurance carrier sub-contracted with Defendant to remediate the effects of the purported damages caused by Waterseal. Plaintiffs allege that Defendant's efforts actually made the problem worse.

In March, 2012, Plaintiffs' counsel instituted settlement negotiations with Michael Spear ("Spear"), a claims representative for Defendant's insurance carrier. On September 19, 2012, following oral negotiations, the following email exchange occurred between Spear and Plaintiffs' counsel:

From: Spear, Michael
Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2012 11:14 AM
To: Kevin ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.