In Battaglia v. Wilmington Sav. Fund Soc., Del.Supr, 379 A.2d 1132 (1977), the defendant, a bank, acknowledged receipt of the complaint, but inadvertently misplaced it, and ultimately the complaint "'slipped' his mind." Id. at 1135. The Supreme Court's conclusion that there was no abuse of discretion was not based on a finding that the defendant's conduct was excusable neglect within the meaning of Rule 60. Id. ("assuming that the neglect to which the Bank admits is not excusable within the meaning of the Rule, that does not end the matter because the record contains additional facts which must be considered as we review the Court's exercise of discretion"). The Court found that there was no abuse of discretion after consideration of additional facts in the records, including disparities between the amount of damages sought in the complaint and the amount identified in the plaintiff's subsequent affidavit. Id. at 1136.