Delaware
Punitive Damages in Delaware: No General Cap, Proof and Rules (2026)
Independently fact-checked against primary sources (last audited October 19, 2026). · 20 primary sources cited on this page. How we verify our legal content
Delaware allows punitive damages as a common-law remedy. In Jardel Co. v. Hughes, 523 A.2d 518 (Del. 1987), the Delaware Supreme Court required a close examination of whether the defendant's conduct is "outrageous," because of "evil motive" or "reckless indifference to the rights of others," and noted that even gross negligence will not suffice where reckless or wilful conduct is a prerequisite for punitive damages. Delaware has no general punitive damages statute and no general statutory cap; 10 Del. C. 3724(d)(6) (wrongful death) and 18 Del. C. 6855 (medical negligence) limit punitive damages in those actions to malicious or wilful or wanton misconduct (wrongful death adds reckless misconduct) and require a separate finding.
For how other states compare, see punitive damages laws by state.
Information last verified on 2026-10-19. This article has not been reviewed by a licensed lawyer.
Jurisdiction scope: This article covers Delaware state law on punitive damages in civil cases: the common-law standard stated by the Delaware Supreme Court, 10 Del. C. 3724(d)(6), 18 Del. C. 6855 and the other statutes and decisions named below. It does not cover compensatory or noneconomic damages in medical negligence cases (see Delaware medical malpractice law), wrongful-death procedure, deadlines and beneficiaries (see Delaware wrongful death law), federal claims, or every statute that authorizes punitive damages for a particular claim beyond those named here.
Does Delaware allow punitive damages?
Yes. Punitive damages in Delaware come from the courts rather than a general statute. The leading case is Jardel Co. v. Hughes (1987), which drew its test from the Restatement (Second) of Torts. Two statutes add conditions for particular actions: 10 Del. C. 3724(d)(6) for wrongful death and 18 Del. C. 6855 for medical negligence. Other statutes authorize or limit punitive damages for specific claims, as described below.
Contract claims. The Superior Court's pattern jury instructions note that punitive damages are not recoverable in breach of contract actions unless the conduct also amounts to an independent tort, except in the insurance bad-faith context.
What must be proven
Outrageous conduct from evil motive or reckless indifference. In Jardel, the Delaware Supreme Court stated:
"The penal aspect and public policy considerations which justify the imposition of punitive damages require that they be imposed only after a close examination of whether the defendant's conduct is "outrageous," because of "evil motive" or "reckless indifference to the rights of others." Restatement (Second) of Torts § 908, comment b (1979). Mere inadvertence, mistake or errors of judgment which constitute mere negligence will not suffice. ... It is not enough that a decision be wrong. It must result from a conscious indifference to the decision's foreseeable effect."
Gross negligence is not enough. In a footnote, Jardel explained: "Simple negligence suffices for recovery of compensatory damages, and where reckless (wanton) or wilful conduct is required, either as a threshold for recovery, as in claims based on the premises guest statute or as a prerequisite for the recovery of punitive damages, as in this case, even gross negligence will not suffice."
Conscious indifference. In Porter v. Turner, 954 A.2d 308 (Del. 2008), the Delaware Supreme Court stated: "For a defendant's conduct to be found wilful or wanton, the conduct must reflect a 'conscious indifference' or 'I don't care' attitude." Applying that test to a tractor-trailer driver who, on one witness's account, faced a red light for eight seconds and accelerated through the intersection, the court said that if the jury accepted that testimony, "they could reasonably find that that conduct constituted wilful and wanton disregard of the safety of others." For the rest of a crash claim, see Delaware car accident law.
Burden of proof. No statute sets the burden of proof; neither 10 Del. C. 3724(d)(6) nor 18 Del. C. 6855 states one. The Superior Court's civil pattern jury instruction on punitive damages (2025 Edition, 22.27) tells jurors they may award punitive damages "if you find by a preponderance of the evidence that [defendant's name] acted [intentionally / recklessly]," and that punitive damages "cannot be awarded for mere inadvertence, mistake, errors of judgment and the like, which constitute ordinary negligence." In a defamation case against a media defendant, the pattern instruction (22.15) requires clear and convincing evidence that the defendant acted with actual malice; its comment says that for a defendant that is not a media entity the burden is a preponderance of the evidence. The pattern instructions are advisory reference guides, not statutes.
Is there a cap on punitive damages in Delaware?
Delaware has no general statutory cap or multiplier on punitive damages, and the wrongful death and medical negligence statutes set conditions rather than dollar limits. Some statutes for particular claims set their own limits:
| Statute | What it limits | Limit in the statute's words |
|---|---|---|
| 19 Del. C. 715(c) | "An award of compensatory or punitive damages, or both," under paragraph (b)(3)a. or b. of that section, in a Superior Court employment discrimination action under the Discrimination in Employment Act | $50,000 (4 through 14 employees), $75,000 (15 through 100), $175,000 (101 through 200), $300,000 (201 through 500), $500,000 (more than 500) |
| 19 Del. C. 2003(b) | Punitive damages owed to a service employee not retained as the Service Worker Protection Act requires (19 Del. C. 2002) | "an amount not exceeding $2,500" for a first violation; "not exceeding $5,000" for a second or subsequent violation; each work week with a violation is a separate violation |
| 6 Del. C. 2003(b) | Exemplary damages under the Uniform Trade Secrets Act where "wilful and malicious misappropriation exists" | "an amount not exceeding twice any award made under subsection (a)" |
Other statutes set the measure, require the award or bar the remedy for particular claims. A person injured by racketeering may recover 3 times actual damages "and, when appropriate, punitive damages" (11 Del. C. 1505(c)); the subsection adds that "no action may be had under § 1503 of this title except against a defendant who has been criminally convicted of a racketeering activity which was the source of the injury alleged, and no action may be brought under this provision except within 1 year of such conviction." For a wilful timber trespass, the court "shall award exemplary damages equal to triple the fair value of the trees removed plus the cost of litigation" (25 Del. C. 1401(b)). Under the Uniform Public Expression Protection Act, in civil actions filed on or after September 15, 2025, the court "shall award punitive damages" to a party that wins a motion under 10 Del. C. 6003 if the court finds the suit was "commenced or continued for the purpose of harassing, intimidating, punishing, or otherwise maliciously inhibiting" its free exercise of speech, petition or association rights (10 Del. C. 6010(b)). Punitive damages are not available in a technology dispute heard by the Court of Chancery under 10 Del. C. 346.
Claims against government defendants have a separate damages limit. Under 10 Del. C. 4013(a), "the claim for and award of damages, including costs, against both a political subdivision and its employees, shall not exceed $300,000 for any and all claims arising out of a single occurrence, except insofar as the political subdivision elects to purchase liability insurance in excess of $300,000 in which event the limit of recovery shall not exceed the amount of the insurance coverage."
At the other end, the pet-injury statute, 10 Del. C. 3931(c), states that it "may not be construed as a limitation on punitive damages where otherwise appropriate under the law and in light of the facts related to a claim asserted under this section."
Does Delaware take a share of the award?
No general Delaware statute diverts part of a punitive award to the state or a fund. The wrongful death and medical negligence punitive damages statutes, 10 Del. C. 3724 and 18 Del. C. 6855, do not allocate any part of an award to the state.
Punitive damages in Delaware wrongful death and survival actions
Wrongful death, since July 17, 2023. Senate Bill 81 (84 Del. Laws c. 95), effective July 17, 2023, added this paragraph to 10 Del. C. 3724(d):
"(6) In any action for wrongful death, punitive damages may be awarded only if it is found that the death was maliciously intended or was the result of reckless, wilful or wanton misconduct by the tortfeasor and may be awarded only if separately awarded by the trier of fact in a separate finding from any finding of compensatory damages which separate finding shall also state the amounts being awarded for each such category of damages."
The bill's synopsis explains what changed: the addition "will permit the spouse, parents, children, and siblings of a deceased person to recover punitive damages when the actions resulting in the death of another person were maliciously intended or the result of willful or wanton misconduct by the at fault party," and "Presently, an estate can recover punitive damages under a survival action pursuant to 10 Del C. § 3701." Older sources that say wrongful-death beneficiaries cannot recover punitive damages describe the law before this act; in Reynolds v. Willis, 209 A.2d 760 (Del. 1965), the Delaware Supreme Court had said that "punitive damages may not be recovered in a widow's action since they do not constitute a pecuniary loss."
Survival actions. Under 10 Del. C. 3701, "All causes of action, except actions for defamation, malicious prosecution, or upon penal statutes, shall survive to and against the executors or administrators of the person to, or against whom, the cause of action accrued." A wrongful death action may also be maintained against the personal representative of a wrongdoer who dies before the action is commenced (10 Del. C. 3722(c)). Punitive damages may also be recovered against the estate of a wrongdoer who has died: in Estate of Farrell v. Gordon, 770 A.2d 517 (Del. 2001), the Delaware Supreme Court concluded that "in the absence of a specific statutory restriction, there is no basis to bar recovery for punitive damages against the estate of a deceased tortfeasor."
Deadlines, who may bring the claim and how damages are divided are on the Delaware wrongful death page.
Medical negligence: 18 Del. C. 6855
Section 6855 provides:
"In any action for medical negligence, punitive damages may be awarded only if it is found that the injury complained of was maliciously intended or was the result of wilful or wanton misconduct by the health-care provider, and may be awarded only if separately awarded by the trier of fact in a separate finding from any finding of compensatory damages which separate finding shall also state the amounts being awarded for each such category of damages. Injuries shall not be considered maliciously intended in instances in which unforeseen damage or injury results from intended medication, manipulation, surgery, treatment or the intended omission thereof, administered or omitted without actual malice or if the intended treatment is applied or omitted by mistake to or for the wrong patient or wrong organ."
The medical negligence statute names malice and wilful or wanton misconduct; unlike the wrongful death provision, it does not list reckless misconduct. In Willey v. Phoenix Rehab. & Health Servs., Inc. (Del. Super. Ct. Feb. 19, 2026), the Superior Court applied 6855 using the same definition of wilful or wanton conduct: conduct that reflects a "conscious indifference or I don't care attitude." For compensatory damages and other malpractice rules, see Delaware medical malpractice law.
How the amount is decided
In wrongful death and medical negligence actions, the statutes require the trier of fact to award punitive damages "in a separate finding from any finding of compensatory damages," stating the amount for each category. No Delaware statute sets a ratio between punitive and compensatory damages.
In any case, the Superior Court's pattern jury instruction (22.27) tells jurors that "the law provides no fixed standards for the amount of punitive damages." Jurors consider how reprehensible or outrageous the conduct was and what amount will deter the defendant and others; they may consider the defendant's financial condition for that purpose only, and when compensatory and punitive damages go to the jury together, not in assessing compensatory damages. Any award "must bear a reasonable relationship" to the compensatory damages, and the punitive amount is stated separately on the verdict form.
The U.S. Supreme Court's due-process limits on the size of punitive awards also apply to Delaware verdicts; the punitive damages hub explains them.
Employer liability
Under the Superior Court's pattern jury instruction (22.27A), a jury may award punitive damages against an employer or principal because of an employee's or agent's act if one of four conditions is met: the employer or a managerial agent authorized the doing and manner of the act; the employee was unfit and the employer or a managerial agent was reckless in employing or retaining the employee; the employee was employed in a managerial capacity and was acting within the scope of employment; or the employer or a managerial agent ratified or approved the act. The instruction's comment says punitive damages may be awarded against the employer or principal only if they have first been awarded against the individual tortfeasor.
Government defendants and public employees
The State and its officers. Under 10 Del. C. 4001, no claim arises and "no judgment, damages, penalties, costs or other money entitlement shall be awarded or assessed against the State or any public officer or employee" where the act involved an official duty requiring a determination of policy, was done in good faith in the belief that the public interest would best be served, and was done "without gross or wanton negligence."
Local government employees. Under 10 Del. C. 4011(c), an employee "may be personally liable for acts or omissions causing property damage, bodily injury or death in instances in which the governmental entity is immune under this section, but only for those acts which were not within the scope of employment or which were performed with wanton negligence or wilful and malicious intent." The $300,000 per-occurrence limit in 4013(a), described above, covers claims against both a political subdivision and its employees.
School employees. Under 14 Del. C. 1095, a board of education "shall not be responsible for the payment of punitive damages nor damages attributable to intentional acts or the gross negligence of such person."
Does insurance pay punitive damages in Delaware?
It can. In Whalen v. On-Deck, Inc., 514 A.2d 1072 (Del. 1986), the Delaware Supreme Court held: "In conclusion, public policy in this State does not prohibit the issuance of an insurance contract that covers punitive damages. Having so ruled, we now remand this case to the Superior Court to determine whether On-Deck's insurance policy with General Accident insured against punitive damage awards." Whether a particular policy covers them depends on its wording.
One statute draws a line: under 18 Del. C. 4205, a "covered claim" under that section "shall in no event include: 1. Any amount awarded as punitive, bad faith or exemplary damages regardless of the language of the insurance policy invoked."
Delaware punitive damages at a glance
| Question | Delaware rule | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Source of the remedy | Common law; no general statute | Jardel Co. v. Hughes (Del. 1987) |
| Conduct standard | Outrageous conduct from evil motive or reckless indifference; conscious indifference or I don't care attitude | Jardel; Porter v. Turner (Del. 2008) |
| Gross negligence | Not enough where reckless or wilful conduct is required | Jardel, footnote 9 |
| Burden of proof | Preponderance of the evidence (clear and convincing evidence of actual malice against a media defendant in defamation) | Del. Super. Ct. Civil Pattern Jury Instr. 22.27, 22.15 |
| Employer liability | Authorization, reckless hiring or retention of an unfit employee, managerial employee acting in scope, or ratification; requires a punitive award against the employee first | Del. Super. Ct. Civil Pattern Jury Instr. 22.27A |
| Breach of contract | Not recoverable unless the conduct is also an independent tort, except insurance bad faith | Del. Super. Ct. Civil Pattern Jury Instr. contract damages comment |
| General cap | None; claim-specific limits and measures | 19 Del. C. 715(c), 19 Del. C. 2003(b), 6 Del. C. 2003(b), 25 Del. C. 1401(b) |
| Wrongful death | Since July 17, 2023: malice or reckless, wilful or wanton misconduct; separate finding | 10 Del. C. 3724(d)(6) |
| Medical negligence | Malice or wilful or wanton misconduct; separate finding | 18 Del. C. 6855 |
| Political subdivisions | $300,000 per occurrence on damages including costs, unless excess insurance is bought | 10 Del. C. 4013(a) |
| State share | No general split-recovery statute | No statute |
| Insurance | Public policy does not prohibit coverage; depends on the policy | Whalen v. On-Deck (Del. 1986) |
Recent changes
The most significant recent change is SB 81 (84 Del. Laws c. 95), effective July 17, 2023, which added 10 Del. C. 3724(d)(6) and with it punitive damages in wrongful death actions, on a malice or reckless, wilful or wanton standard and in a separate finding. The common-law standard has not changed; the Superior Court used the same conscious-indifference definition in Willey (Feb. 19, 2026).
In 2025, Delaware adopted the Uniform Public Expression Protection Act (85 Del. Laws c. 217). For civil actions filed on or after September 15, 2025, 10 Del. C. 6010(b) requires the court to award punitive damages to a party that wins a motion under 6003 if it shows the suit was commenced or continued to harass, intimidate, punish or maliciously inhibit its free exercise of speech, petition or association rights. The same year, 85 Del. Laws c. 155 amended the pet-injury statute, 10 Del. C. 3931, which still states that it is not a limitation on punitive damages.
Coming next: a new subchapter on voter intimidation, deception and obstruction (85 Del. Laws c. 421), effective July 1, 2027, makes a violator liable for "compensatory or punitive damages for any intentional violation" (15 Del. C. 8131).
Related pages
- Punitive damages laws by state
- Delaware wrongful death law
- Delaware medical malpractice law
- Delaware car accident law
This article provides general legal information about Delaware punitive damages law as of 2026-10-19. It is not legal advice. For advice about a specific situation, contact a lawyer licensed in Delaware.
Last updated: 2026-10-19.
Frequently Asked Questions
Does Delaware allow punitive damages?
Yes. Delaware courts award punitive damages at common law for conduct that is outrageous because of evil motive or reckless indifference to the rights of others (Jardel Co. v. Hughes, 1987). Statutes add conditions for wrongful death (10 Del. C. 3724(d)(6)) and medical negligence (18 Del. C. 6855) actions.
Is there a cap on punitive damages in Delaware?
Delaware has no general statutory cap on punitive damages. Some statutes for particular claims set their own limits, such as 19 Del. C. 715(c) (combined compensatory and punitive limits from $50,000 to $500,000 by number of employees), 19 Del. C. 2003(b) ($2,500 for a first violation or $5,000 for a later one, each work week counting separately) and 6 Del. C. 2003(b) (twice any award under subsection (a)), and 25 Del. C. 1401(b) sets exemplary damages for wilful timber trespass at triple the fair value of the trees plus the cost of litigation. Claims against political subdivisions are subject to the $300,000 per-occurrence limit on damages in 10 Del. C. 4013(a), unless excess insurance is bought.
Is gross negligence enough for punitive damages in Delaware?
No. In Jardel Co. v. Hughes (1987), the Delaware Supreme Court said that where reckless or wilful conduct is a prerequisite for punitive damages, even gross negligence will not suffice, and that mere inadvertence, mistake or errors of judgment will not suffice either.
What is the burden of proof for punitive damages in Delaware?
No Delaware statute sets one. The Superior Court's civil pattern jury instruction (22.27) tells jurors they may award punitive damages if they find by a preponderance of the evidence that the defendant acted intentionally or recklessly. In a defamation case against a media defendant, the pattern instruction (22.15) requires clear and convincing evidence of actual malice. The pattern instructions are advisory, not statutes.
Are punitive damages available in a Delaware wrongful death case?
Since SB 81 took effect on July 17, 2023, 10 Del. C. 3724(d)(6) allows punitive damages in a wrongful death action only if the death was maliciously intended or the result of reckless, wilful or wanton misconduct by the tortfeasor, awarded in a separate finding. Before that act, the bill's sponsors noted, an estate could recover punitive damages under a survival action.
Are punitive damages available in a Delaware medical malpractice case?
Under 18 Del. C. 6855, only if the injury was maliciously intended or the result of wilful or wanton misconduct by the health-care provider, in a separate finding from compensatory damages. Unforeseen results of intended treatment given without actual malice, and treatment applied by mistake to the wrong patient or organ, are not considered maliciously intended.
Does insurance cover punitive damages in Delaware?
It can. In Whalen v. On-Deck, Inc. (1986), the Delaware Supreme Court held that public policy in Delaware does not prohibit an insurance contract that covers punitive damages, and sent the case back to decide whether that particular policy did.
Does Delaware take part of a punitive damages award?
No general Delaware statute sends part of a punitive award to the state or a fund.
Updates
Independently fact-checked against the cited primary sources
The Law Behind This Article
This article rests on the statutory provisions below, held in our own legal record and retrieved from the official source. Tap a section to read the operative text.
Delaware Code, Title 10 (Courts and Judicial Procedure), Chapter 037 (SURVIVAL OF ACTIONS AND CAUSES OF ACTION; WRONGFUL DEATH ACTIONS)
§ 3724Action for wrongful death.In forcecited in 2 of our articles
(a) An action under this subchapter shall be for the benefit of the spouse, parent, child and siblings of the deceased person. (b) If there are no persons who qualify under subsection (a) of this section, an action shall be for the benefit of any person related to the deceased person by blood or marriage. (c) In an action under this subchapter, damages may be awarded to the beneficiaries proportioned to the injury resulting from the wrongful death. The amount recovered shall be divided among the beneficiaries in shares directed by the verdict. (d) In fixing the amount of damages to be awarded under this subchapter, the court or jury shall consider all the facts and circumstances and from them fix the award at such sum as will fairly compensate for the injury resulting from the death.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-09-06 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at delcode.delaware.gov
Also relied on in: Wrongful Death Laws in Delaware (2026): Deadlines
Delaware Code, Title 18 (Insurance Code), Chapter 068 (HEALTH-CARE MEDICAL NEGLIGENCE INSURANCE AND LITIGATION)
§ 6855Punitive damages.In forcecited in 2 of our articles
In any action for medical negligence, punitive damages may be awarded only if it is found that the injury complained of was maliciously intended or was the result of wilful or wanton misconduct by the health-care provider, and may be awarded only if separately awarded by the trier of fact in a separate finding from any finding of compensatory damages which separate finding shall also state the amounts being awarded for each such category of damages. Injuries shall not be considered maliciously intended in instances in which unforeseen damage or injury results from intended medication, manipulation, surgery, treatment or the intended omission thereof, administered or omitted without actual malice or if the intended treatment is applied or omitted by mistake to or for the wrong patient or wrong organ.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at delcode.delaware.gov
Cited in 8 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Estate of Susan J. Moulder v. Park, M.D. (Superior Court of Delaware 2022)“…in January 2018 and order the three-month follow-up 69 18 Del. C. § 6855. 70 Id. 71 Id. 72 Vick v. Khan…”
- Armstrong v. A.I. DuPont Hospital for Children (Superior Court of Delaware 2012, 60 A.3d 414)“…Inc. v. Hughes, 523 A.2d 518, 528 (Del.1987). . 18 Del. C. § 6855. . Pattanayak v. Khan, 2005 WL…”
- Spencer v. Goodill (Supreme Court of Delaware 2011, 17 A.3d 552)“…18 Del C. § 6853. 15 . 18 Del. C. § 6855. 16 . 18…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Medical Malpractice Laws in Delaware (2026): Deadlines & Caps
Delaware Code, Title 10 (Courts and Judicial Procedure), Chapter 040 (TORT CLAIMS ACT)
§ 4011Immunity from suit.In force
(a) Except as otherwise expressly provided by statute, all governmental entities and their employees shall be immune from suit on any and all tort claims seeking recovery of damages. That a governmental entity has the power to sue or be sued, whether appearing in its charter or statutory enablement, shall not create or be interpreted as a waiver of the immunity granted in this subchapter. (b) Notwithstanding § 4012 of this title, a governmental entity shall not be liable for any damage claim which results from: (1) The undertaking or failure to undertake any legislative act, including, but not limited to, the adoption or failure to adopt any statute, charter, ordinance, order, regulation, resolution or resolve. (2) The undertaking or failure to undertake any judicial or quasi-judicial act, including, but not limited to, granting, granting with conditions, refusal to grant or revocation of any license, permit, order or other administrative approval or denial.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at delcode.delaware.gov
§ 4013Limitation on damages.In forcecited in 2 of our articles
(a) In any action for damages permitted by this subchapter, the claim for and award of damages, including costs, against both a political subdivision and its employees, shall not exceed $300,000 for any and all claims arising out of a single occurrence, except insofar as the political subdivision elects to purchase liability insurance in excess of $300,000 in which event the limit of recovery shall not exceed the amount of the insurance coverage. (b) Any governmental entity may settle claims filed against it pursuant to § 4012 of this title, in accordance with procedures duly promulgated by its governing body. (c) Any political subdivision may enact a notice requirement by ordinance, so long as said notice requirement does not bar suit if notice is given within 1 year of occurrence.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at delcode.delaware.gov
Cited in 6 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2019
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Porter v. Delmarva Power & Light Co. (Superior Court of Delaware 1984, 488 A.2d 899)“…otected by sovereign immunity, within the limit provided in 10 Del.C. § 4013. There remains the question of w…”
- Hines v. New Castle County (Supreme Court of Delaware 1994, 640 A.2d 1026)“…nces, provided the notice period is not less than one year. 10 Del.C. § 4013(c). 2 While this Court has not direc…”
- Duygun v. Allen (Superior Court of Delaware 2019)“…1.01.011 (County’s notice requirement adopted pursuant to 10 Del. C. § 4013(c)).…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Delaware Slip and Fall Laws: Proving Premises Liability
§ 4001Limitation on civil liability.In force
Except as otherwise provided by the Constitutions or laws of the United States or of the State of Delaware, as the same may expressly require or be interpreted as requiring by a court of competent jurisdiction, no claim or cause of action shall arise, and no judgment, damages, penalties, costs or other money entitlement shall be awarded or assessed against the State or any public officer or employee, including the members of any board, commission, conservation district or agency of the State, whether elected or appointed, and whether now or previously serving as such, in any civil suit or proceeding at law or in equity, or before any administrative tribunal, where the following elements are present: (1) The act or omission complained of arose out of and in connection with the performance of an official duty requiring a determination of policy, the interpretation or enforcement of statutes, rules or regulations, the granting or withholding of publicly created or regulated entitlement or privilege or any other official duty involving the exercise of discretion on the part of the public officer, employee or member, or anyone over whom the public officer, employee or member shall…
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at delcode.delaware.gov
Delaware Code, Title 19 (Labor), Chapter 007 (EMPLOYMENT PRACTICES)
§ 715Judicial remedies; civil penalties.In force
(a) Superior Court shall have jurisdiction over all proceedings brought by the charging party under § 714 of this title. Superior Court may excuse a charging party who has complied with the compulsory conciliation provisions of this chapter from the compulsory arbitration provisions of Superior Court rules. (b) Superior Court may order any of the following: (1) That the respondent cease and desist or modify its existing employment policies. (2) That the respondent hire, reinstate, or promote the charging party. (3) The payment of any of the following: a. Compensatory damages. b. Punitive damages. c. Special damages, including back pay and interest on back pay. d. Front pay. (4) Equitable relief provided under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5. (5) The costs of litigation and reasonable attorney’s fees to the prevailing party. (c) An award of compensatory or punitive damages, or both, under paragraph (b)(3)a. or b. of this section, may not exceed the following: (1) For a respondent with 4 through 14 employees, $50,000. (2) For a respondent with 15 through 100 employees, $75,000.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at delcode.delaware.gov
Delaware Code, Title 19 (Labor), Chapter 020 (Service Worker Protection Act [For application of this chapter, see 84 Del. Laws, c. 453, § 3])
§ 2003Penalties [For application of this section, see 84 Del. Laws, c. 453, § 3].In force
(a) A service employee who has been discharged or otherwise not retained in violation of this chapter may bring an action as follows: (1) Against the awarding authority, for any violation of § 2002(a) through (b) of this title. (2) Against the successor employer, for any violation of § 2002(c) through (h) of this title. (b) A person who refuses, fails, or neglects to comply with § 2002 of this title is liable to the service employee for punitive damages as follows: (1) For a first violation, an amount not exceeding $2,500. (2) For a second or subsequent violation, an amount not exceeding $5,000. (3) Each work week during which there is a day when a violation occurs constitutes a separate violation. (c) In addition to the damages under subsection (b) of this section, the court may do any of the following for a violation of § 2002 of this title: (1) Award the service employee reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs. (2) Require the violator to pay special damages, including back pay and interest on back pay. (3) Require the violator to pay compensatory damages. (4) Issue injunctive relief requiring a successor employer to do any of the following: a.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at delcode.delaware.gov
Delaware Code, Title 6 (Commerce and Trade), Chapter 020 (TRADE SECRETS)
§ 2003Damages.In forcecited in 2 of our articles
(a) Except to the extent that a material and prejudicial change of position prior to acquiring knowledge or reason to know of misappropriation renders a monetary recovery inequitable, a complainant is entitled to recover damages for misappropriation. Damages can include both the actual loss caused by misappropriation and the unjust enrichment caused by misappropriation that is not taken into account in computing actual loss. In lieu of damages measured by any other methods, the damages caused by misappropriation may be measured by imposition of liability for a reasonable royalty for a misappropriator’s unauthorized disclosure or use of a trade secret. (b) If wilful and malicious misappropriation exists, the court may award exemplary damages in an amount not exceeding twice any award made under subsection (a) of this section.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-09-08 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at delcode.delaware.gov
Also relied on in: Delaware Trade Secret Laws: UTSA, Remedies & Deadlines
Delaware Code, Title 10 (Courts and Judicial Procedure), Chapter 039 (PLEADING AND PRACTICE)
§ 3931Civil actions for tortious injuries, including death, to lawfully-owned pets.In force
(a) Definitions. For purposes of this section: (1) “Compensatory damages” means all of the following: a. In the case of the death of a pet, the fair market value of the pet before death and the reasonable and necessary cost of veterinary care. b. In the case of an injury to a pet, the reasonable and necessary cost of veterinary care. (2) “Owner” means a person who purchases or is gifted a pet. (3) “Pet” means all of the following: a. “Pet” means a domesticated animal. b. “Pet” does not include livestock, or an animal possessed or kept in violation of State, county, or municipal law. (b) A person who tortiously causes an injury to, or death of, a pet while acting directly or through an animal under that person’s ownership, direction, or control is liable to the owner of the pet for compensatory damages. (c) This section may not be construed as a limitation on punitive damages where otherwise appropriate under the law and in light of the facts related to a claim asserted under this section. If a pet is owned by multiple persons, the limitations outlined in this section apply.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at delcode.delaware.gov
Delaware Code, Title 14 (Education), Chapter 010 (REORGANIZATION OF SCHOOL DISTRICTS)
§ 1095Liability of local school districts for costs in actions against members of board or employees thereof.In force
Whenever a civil action has been or shall be brought against any person for any act or omission arising out of and in the course of the performance of that person’s duties as a member of a board of education, principal, assistant principal, superintendent, assistant superintendent or professional employee, including a teacher, the board of education of that school district shall defray all costs of defending such action, including reasonable counsel fees and expenses, together with costs of appeal, if any, and shall save harmless and protect such person from any financial loss resulting therefrom; provided, however, the board of education shall not be responsible for the payment of punitive damages nor damages attributable to intentional acts or the gross negligence of such person. Any board of education may arrange for and maintain appropriate insurance to cover all such damages, losses and expenses. The State shall not be liable for such financial obligation incurred by a local school district.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at delcode.delaware.gov
Delaware Code, Title 18 (Insurance Code), Chapter 042 (DELAWARE INSURANCE GUARANTY ASSOCIATION ACT)
§ 4205Definitions.In force
As used in this chapter: (1) “Affiliate” means a person who directly or indirectly, through 1 or more intermediaries, controls, is controlled by or is under common control with an insolvent insurer on December 31 of the year next preceding the date the insurer becomes an insolvent insurer. (2) “Association” means the Delaware Insurance Guaranty Association created under § 4206 of this title. (3) “Claimant” means any insured making a first-party claim or any person instituting a liability claim; provided that no person who is an affiliate of an insolvent insurer may be a claimant. (4) “Commissioner” means the Commissioner of Insurance of this State.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at delcode.delaware.gov
Search our full record of US law — 2.1 million sections, every state + federal →
Sources and References
- Jardel Co. v. Hughes, 523 A.2d 518 (Del. 1987)(www.courtlistener.com)
- 10 Del. C. 3724: Action for wrongful death(delcode.delaware.gov).gov
- 18 Del. C. 6855: Punitive damages (medical negligence)(delcode.delaware.gov).gov
- Porter v. Turner, 954 A.2d 308 (Del. 2008)(www.courtlistener.com)
- 19 Del. C. 715: Discrimination in Employment Act (Title 19, chapter 7, subchapter II)(delcode.delaware.gov).gov
- 19 Del. C. 2003: Service Worker Protection Act (Title 19, chapter 20)(delcode.delaware.gov).gov
- 6 Del. C. 2003: Uniform Trade Secrets Act (Title 6, chapter 20)(delcode.delaware.gov).gov
- 10 Del. C. 4011 and 4013(delcode.delaware.gov).gov
- 10 Del. C. 3931: Civil actions for tortious injuries, including death, to lawfully-owned pets(delcode.delaware.gov).gov
- Delaware Senate Bill 81 (152nd General Assembly), 84 Del. Laws c. 95(legis.delaware.gov).gov
- Reynolds v. Willis, 209 A.2d 760 (Del. 1965)(www.courtlistener.com)
- 10 Del. C. 3701: Survival of actions(delcode.delaware.gov).gov
- 10 Del. C. 3722(delcode.delaware.gov).gov
- Willey v. Phoenix Rehab. & Health Servs., Inc., C.A. No. N23C-09-033 KMM (Del. Super. Ct. Feb. 19, 2026)(courts.delaware.gov).gov
- 10 Del. C. 4001(delcode.delaware.gov).gov
- 14 Del. C. 1095(delcode.delaware.gov).gov
- Whalen v. On-Deck, Inc., 514 A.2d 1072 (Del. 1986)(www.courtlistener.com)
- 18 Del. C. 4205(delcode.delaware.gov).gov
- Superior Court of Delaware, Pattern Jury Instructions for Civil Practice (2025 Edition): 22.15, 22.27, 22.27A and contract damages comment(www.courts.delaware.gov).gov
- Estate of Farrell ex rel. Bennett v. Gordon, 770 A.2d 517 (Del. 2001)(static.case.law)
- 10 Del. C. 6010: Uniform Public Expression Protection Act (Title 10, chapter 60)(delcode.delaware.gov).gov
- 11 Del. C. 1505: Racketeering civil remedies (Title 11, chapter 15)(delcode.delaware.gov).gov
- 25 Del. C. 1401: Timber trespass damages (Title 25, chapter 14)(delcode.delaware.gov).gov
- 10 Del. C. 346: Technology disputes (Title 10, chapter 3, subchapter III)(delcode.delaware.gov).gov
- 15 Del. C. 8131: Standing and remedies (Title 15, chapter 81, subchapter III, effective July 1, 2027)(delcode.delaware.gov).gov
Paid attorney referral. RecordingLaw may receive compensation when you use an attorney-help link. RecordingLaw is not a law firm. Submitting a request does not guarantee that an attorney will accept your case and does not create an attorney-client relationship.