Skip to main content

Doe v. State

Citations

  • 76 A.3d 774
  • 2013 WL 5006496
  • 2013 Del. LEXIS 469

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • arguing that the first prong of § 228 (that the conduct needed to be of the kind the Officer was employed to perform
  • finding that a police officer committing sexual assault on someone in his custody should be considered within the scope of employment under § 228 for the purposes of summary judgment
  • reversing and remanding for jury to determine whether police officer was acting in the scope of his employment when he sexually assaulted arrestee
  • reversing entry of summary judgment to defendant on scope of employment
  • \The third factor-whether [the Officer] was activated in part to serve his employer-has been construed broadly as a matter for the jury to decide.\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Berger, Holland, Jacobs, Noble, Ridgely

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

11 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

8 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.