DeRossi v. DeRossi

• Court: Supreme Court of Delaware
• Decided: August 27, 2024
• Docket: 278, 2024
• Status: Published

Opinion

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE

DEREK DeROSSI, § § No. 278, 2024 Petitioner Below, § Appellant, § Court Below: Family Court § of the State of Delaware v. § § File No. CN22-05066 KAREN DeROSSI, § Petition No. 22-22163 § Respondent Below, § Appellee. §

Submitted: August 12, 2024 Decided: August 27, 2024

Before SEITZ, Chief Justice; VALIHURA and TRAYNOR, Justices.

ORDER

After consideration of the notice to show cause and the response, it appears to

the Court that:

(1) The appellant (“Ex-Husband”) filed this appeal from a Family Court

order resolving matters ancillary to the parties’ divorce (the “Ancillary Order”). The

Ancillary Order provided that if either party were seeking an award of attorneys’

fees, the party should file a motion seeking such relief within twenty days of the

mailing of the Ancillary Order or the Ancillary Order would be the court’s final

order in the matter. The Family Court docket reflects that the Ancillary Order was

mailed June 20, 2024. (2) The appellee (“Ex-Wife”) filed a motion and affidavit seeking

attorneys’ fees. The motion is dated, and the affidavit is notarized, July 10, 2024,

the twentieth day after the mailing of the Ancillary Order.1 The accompanying

certificate of service states that Ex-Wife’s counsel served the motion on Ex-Husband

on July 10, 2024. The Family Court docket reflects that the motion was filed July

11, 2024; the court does not appear to have applied a filing-date stamp to the

document itself. Ex-Husband filed an opposition to the motion for attorneys’ fees

on August 5, 2024. The Family Court has not ruled on the motion.

(3) Absent compliance with Supreme Court Rule 42, the appellate

jurisdiction of this Court is limited to the review of final orders.2 An order is deemed

final and appealable if the decision is the trial court’s final act in disposing of all

justiciable matters within its jurisdiction.3 A judgment on the merits in an ancillary

proceeding is not final until an outstanding application for attorneys’ fees has been

decided.4

1 See DEL. FAM. CT. R. 6(a) (“In computing any period of time prescribed or allowed by these Rules, by order of Court, or by any applicable statute, the day of the act, event, or default from which the designated period of time begins to run shall not be included. The last day of the period so computed shall be included, unless it is a Saturday, a Sunday, or a legal holiday, in which event the period runs until the end of the next day which is not a Saturday, a Sunday, or a legal holiday. . . .”). 2 Campus Eye Mgmt., LLC v. DiDonato, 2024 WL 1597799, at *1 (Del. Apr. 12, 2024). 3 Lipson v. Lipson, 799 A.2d 345, 348 (Del. 2001). 4 See id. (“[T]his Court has consistently held, and hereby reaffirmed, that a judgment on the merits of any request for ancillary relief is not final until an outstanding related application for an award of attorney’s fees has been decided.”). 2 (4) In light of the pending motion for attorneys’ fees, the Clerk of this Court

issued a notice directing Ex-Husband to show cause why the appeal should not be

dismissed as a procedurally improper interlocutory appeal. In response, Ex-

Husband, who is a self-represented litigant, states that the appeal is timely and argues

the merits of the appeal. He does not address the finality of the Family Court’s order.

(5) Because Ex-Wife’s motion for attorneys’ fees remains unresolved, the

appeal is interlocutory and must be dismissed. This dismissal is without prejudice

to any timely appeal that Ex-Husband files from the Family Court’s final order in

the parties’ ancillary proceeding.

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED, under Supreme Court Rule 29(b),

that this appeal is DISMISSED.

BY THE COURT:

/s/ Karen L. Valihura Justice