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.

Bowden v. Pinnacle Rehabilitation and Health Center

Superior Court of Delaware, Kent

April 8, 2015

FREDERICK BOWDEN, Plaintiff,
v.
PINNACLE REHABILITATION AND HEALTH CENTER, AND KENT GENERAL HOSPITAL, BAYHEALTH MEDICAL AND BROOKSIDE CLINICAL LABORATORY, INC., Defendant.

Submitted: April 7, 2015

Upon Consideration of Defendants' Motion to Dismiss GRANTED

Frederick Bowden, Pro se.

Maria R. Granaudo Gesty, Esquire, Burns White, LLC, Wilmington, Delaware for Defendant Pinnacle Rehabilitation and Health Center.

James E. Drnec, Esquire, and Melony R. Anderson, Esquire, Balick & Balick, LLC, Wilmington, Delaware for Defendants Kent General Hospital and Bayhealth Medical.

Jeffrey M. Austin, Esquire, Elzufon Austin Tarlov & Mondell, P.A., Wilmington, Delaware for Defendant Brookside Clinical Laboratory, Inc.

ORDER

Robert B. Young J.

SUMMARY

This suit presents the Court with the infrequent occurrence where Plaintiff's Complaint fails to state a claim so utterly that the Court must dismiss Plaintiff's case. By his Complaint, Frederick Bowden ("Plaintiff") alerts this Court and his named adversaries (Pinnacle Rehabilitation and Health Center ("Pinnacle"), Kent General Hospital ("Kent Gen era l"), Bayhealt h Medical ("Bayhealth"), and Brookside Clinical Laboratory, Inc. ("Brookside" and, together with the preceding parties, "Defendants")) that negligence resulted in the passing of his wife. No further factual specifications are indicated. Although Delaware maintains a benevolent pleading standard for claimants, Plaintiff's statement fails to meet even this low threshold. Defendants' Motions to Dismiss are GRANTED.

FACTS AND PROCEDURES

On February 15, 2015, Plaintiff filed a pro se Complaint against Defendants. Plaintiff's claim appears to arise out of the death of his wife. By two separate motions Defendants' move to dismiss Plaintiff's case.[1]

STANDARD OF REVIEW

The Court's standard of review on a motion to dismiss pursuant to Superior Court Civil Rule 12(b)(6) is well-settled. The Court accepts all well-pled allegations as true.[2] Well-pled means that the complaint puts a party on notice of the claim being brought.[3] If the complaint and facts alleged are sufficient to support a claim on which relief may be granted, the motion is not proper and should be denied.[4] The test for sufficiency is a broad one.[5] If any reasonable conception can be formulated to allow Plaintiff's recovery, the motion to dismiss must be denied.[6] Dismissal ...


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.