Free Answering Brief in Opposition - District Court of Delaware - Delaware

Case 1:04-cv-00911-GMS

Document 162

Filed 03/27/2006

Page 1 of 3

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE JAN KOPACZ and JAN KOPACZ, Administrator of the Estate of Cathy Kopacz Plaintiff, v. DELAWARE RIVER AND BAY AUTHORITY, and CRAIG SWETT, Defendants. ____________________________________ JAN KOPACZ, Plaintiff, v. DELAWARE RIVER AND BAY AUTHORITY, Defendant. : : : : : : : : : : :

C.A. No. 04-911 GMS Jury Trial Demanded

: : : : : : : : : :

C.A. No. 04-1281 GMS

ORDER Upon review of Defendant Swett's opposition to Plaintiff's conditional motion for new trial (D.I. 149), IT IS HEREBY ORDERED this day of , 2006

that the Plaintiff's conditional motion for new trial (D.I. 149) as to Defendant Swett is DENIED.

J.

Case 1:04-cv-00911-GMS

Document 162

Filed 03/27/2006

Page 2 of 3

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE JAN KOPACZ and JAN KOPACZ, Administrator of the Estate of Cathy Kopacz Plaintiff, v. DELAWARE RIVER AND BAY AUTHORITY, and CRAIG SWETT, Defendants. ____________________________________ JAN KOPACZ, Plaintiff, v. DELAWARE RIVER AND BAY AUTHORITY, Defendant. : : : : : : : : : : :

C.A. No. 04-911 GMS Jury Trial Demanded

: : : : : : : : : :

C.A. No. 04-1281 GMS

DEFENDANT SWETT'S RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S PRELIMINARY BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF'S CONDITIONAL MOTION FOR NEW TRIAL Defendant Craig Swett in response to Plaintiff's Preliminary Brief in Support of Plaintiff's Conditional Motion for New Trial (D.I. 149) relies on his response filed on March 2, 2006 (D.I. 138) and will file an answering brief when Plaintiff files his "full" brief on the subject. However, in light of the fact that the Delaware River and Bay Authority ("DRBA") partially satisfied the judgment entered on February 15, 2006 and paid Mr. Kopacz maintenance and cure in the amount of $28,839.00, it appears that any motion for new trial as to the claims against Defendant Swett is moot. The only issue remaining, at this time, is the award of

Case 1:04-cv-00911-GMS

Document 162

Filed 03/27/2006

Page 3 of 3

compensatory damages totaling $47,500.00 for DRBA's refusal to pay maintenance and cure without reasonable justification. This has nothing to do with Defendant Swett. Defendant Swett has nothing to add with respect to the issue of compensatory damages or whether the DRBA did or did not have reasonable justification for its refusal to pay maintenance and cure. Therefore, based on the foregoing, Defendant Swett respectfully requests that any motion for new trial be denied. In the alternative, Defendant Swett respectfully requests that any motion for new trial be denied as to Defendant Swett.

Respectfully submitted, CASARINO, CHRISTMAN & SHALK, P.A. /s/ Donald M. Ransom Donald M. Ransom, Esq. Del. Bar ID No. 2626 800 N. King Street, Suite 200 P.O. Box 1276 Wilmington, DE 19899 (302) 594-4500 Attorney for Defendant Craig Swett

Date: March 27, 2006