Black v. Day

CourtSuperior Court of Delaware
DecidedSeptember 28, 2021
DocketN21C-06-201 MMJ
StatusPublished

This text of Black v. Day (Black v. Day) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Superior Court of Delaware primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Black v. Day, (Del. Ct. App. 2021).

Opinion

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT FOR THE STATE OF DELAWARE

CHERI BLACK, Plaintiff, Vv. C.A. No. N21C-06-201 MMJ

JOSEPH F. DAY,

Defendant.

ee ae a a a

On Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss GRANTED

Plaintiff Black filed a pro se, handwritten Complaint. The handwriting and style are identical to pleadings filed in related litigation by Black’s mother, Emily Baldwin. In total, there are now seven related cases nominally filed by Black, Emily Baldwin, or Maxine Baldwin (Emily Baldwin’s sister).

The procedural and factual history of this litigation is set forth in the Court’s recent decisions - Baldwin v. New Castle County, Del. Super., C.A. No. N20C-12- 126, Johnston, J. (Sept. 14, 2021) (Opinion) and Black v. New Castle County, Del. Super., C.A.No. N20C-08-270, Johnston, J. (Sept. 14, 2021) (Opinion). Both Opinions found that all related cases have been instigated and managed by Emily

Baldwin, who is engaging in the unauthorized practice of law. The Court ruled:

ANY FUTURE CLAIMS BROUGHT AT THE BEHEST AND

UNDER THE DIRECTION OF EMILY BALDWIN WILL BE

SUMMARILY DISMISSED ON THE GROUNDS THAT EMILY

BALDWIN IS ENGAGING IN THE UNAUTHORIZED

PRACTICE OF LAW.

The instant case involves: the same property; the same related disputes about the property with New Castle County; and the same allegations against Day, who is a New Castle County employee.

In Black v. New Castle County, Del. Super., C.A.No. N20C-08-270, the Court dismissed the claims against New Castle County involving the same alleged conduct by its employee Day. The Court found: there is no private cause of action under Title 11 criminal statutes; the Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction to hear breach of fiduciary claims; Black failed to establish a prima facie case for claims of gross negligence, wantonness, or recklessness; Black’s claims are barred by the immunity provided in the County and Municipal Tort Claims Act, and no exception applies; and the alleged psychological injury is insufficient for a claim of intentional infliction of emotional distress, without accompanying physical injury.

The Court finds that Emily Baldwin has instigated and directed this case and

is engaging in the unauthorized practice of law in Delaware THEREFORE, this case is hereby SUMMARILY DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. Further, Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss is hereby GRANTED WITH PREJUDICE for failure to state a claim under Superior Court Civil Rule 12(b)(6).

IT ISSO ORDERED.

Dated: WA U/2 / Le lite

The Hgoworable Mary M. Johnston Delaware Superior Court Judge

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Black v. Day, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/black-v-day-delsuperct-2021.