Supreme Court of Delaware, 1972

Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co. v. Dempsey

Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co. v. Dempsey
Supreme Court of Delaware · Decided January 5, 1972 · Carey, Herrmann, Wolcott
287 A.2d 674; 1972 Del. LEXIS 340 (Atlantic Reporter, Second Series)

Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co. v. Dempsey

Opinion of the Court

PER CURIAM:

In this workmen’s compensation case, the Industrial Accident Board and the Superior Court have concluded that the employee is economically displaced and, therefore, totally disabled. We agree. The case is controlled by M. A. Hartnett, Inc. v. Coleman, Del.Supr., 226 A.2d 910 (1967) and Ham v. Chrysler Corp., Del.Supr., 231 A.2d 258 (1967). The employer has failed to sustain the burden of proof imposed upon it by those cases to show with requisite certainty the availability of suitable employment for this employee, either by it or some other employer.

We find no merit in the appeal from the Superior Court’s conclusions as to the employee’s compliance with 19 Del.C. §§ 2342 and 2361. We agree with the findings and conclusions of the Board and the Court below as to those contentions.

Affirmed.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.