McCool v. Gehret
Delaware Supreme Court
657 A.2d 269 (1995)
- Written by Deanna Curl, JD
Facts
Paul and Tammera McCool (plaintiff) filed a medical-malpractice claim against Dr. Gehret and other healthcare providers (defendant). The McCools later amended the complaint to include a claim for tortious interference with their expert witness and demanded jury trials for both claims. The medical-malpractice claim was heard by a jury, and after the jury’s discharge the judge offered to decide their remaining tortious-interference claim in a bench trial. Based on the judge’s proposal, the McCools agreed to waive their right to a jury trial on the tortuous-interference claim. After the first trial-court judge later declined to hear the case, the McCools objected to a bench trial by a second trial-court judge. Over the McCools’ objection, the bench trial proceeded, and the second judge ultimately found in favor of Dr. Gehret. The McCools then appealed, arguing that the bench trial violated their right to a trial by jury under the Delaware Constitution.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Holland, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
