## Facts

- Ashley Adams and Yaw and Ninette Aidoo were neighbors in Bear, Delaware.
- After a late-night text message received by Yaw Aidoo was traced to Adams’s phone number, police investigated; an officer obtained a warrant and arrested Adams for harassment based on the officer’s independent assessment.
- Adams filed a civil action against the Aidoos asserting dozens of tort claims and seeking multimillion-dollar damages; she later amended the pleading to fewer counts but increased the damages demand.
- The Aidoos answered and asserted counterclaims including invasion of privacy, malicious prosecution, abuse of process, and intentional infliction of emotional distress.
- Discovery was contentious; Adams repeatedly failed to comply with discovery obligations despite court warnings and detailed explanations from the court.
- The case proceeded to a multi-day jury trial after Adams’s claims were narrowed and/or dismissed through pretrial rulings and sanctions.
- The jury found for the Aidoos on abuse of process and awarded $250,000 in damages (with related findings on other counterclaims as presented at trial).
- Adams filed post-trial motions seeking a new trial, a new trial on damages, or remittitur.

## Issues

1. Whether the jury’s verdict on abuse of process was against the great weight of the evidence so as to require a new trial under Delaware Rule 59.
2. Whether alleged evidentiary rulings, references to prior discovery misconduct and prior dismissal, or other trial-management decisions caused unfair prejudice warranting a new trial.
3. Whether the $250,000 award was so excessive that it “shocked the conscience,” requiring remittitur or a new trial on damages.

## Decision

- The Superior Court denied Adams’s motion for a new trial.
- The Superior Court denied Adams’s motion for a new trial on damages.
- The Superior Court denied Adams’s motion for remittitur.
- The court left intact the jury’s $250,000 verdict for the Aidoos on abuse of process.

## Legal Principles

- A Rule 59 new trial is warranted only when the verdict is against the great weight of the evidence or when legal error or procedural irregularity caused unfair prejudice; a supported verdict is not set aside merely because a party disputes the jury’s conclusions.
- Abuse of process is distinct from malicious prosecution: malicious prosecution concerns wrongful initiation of proceedings, while abuse of process concerns misuse of legal process after it issues for an ulterior purpose.
- Trial evidentiary and procedural rulings are reviewed for prejudice; relief is denied absent reversible error affecting substantial rights.
- Remittitur is appropriate only when a damages award is so excessive that it shocks the court’s conscience or reflects passion, prejudice, or disregard of the evidence.

## Conclusion

The Superior Court held that the evidence permitted the jury to find that Adams misused litigation procedures for an improper purpose and that the trial was free of prejudicial error; it therefore denied a new trial and remittitur and upheld the $250,000 abuse-of-process award for the Aidoos.


Adams v. Aidoo, No. 07C-11-177 (MJB), 2012 WL 1408878 (Del. Super. Ct. Mar. 29, 2012)