Grant, Naomi v. Derek Tyson-Davis
This text of Grant, Naomi v. Derek Tyson-Davis (Grant, Naomi v. Derek Tyson-Davis) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Delaware primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
NAOMI GRANT,1 § § No. 483, 2025 Respondent Below, § Appellant, § Court Below—Family Court § of the State of Delaware v. § § File No. CN23-03309 DEREK TYSON-DAVIS, § Petition No. 25-11953 § Petitioner Below, § Appellee. §
Submitted: December 31, 2025 Decided: January 20, 2026
Before VALIHURA, TRAYNOR, and LEGROW, Justices.
ORDER
After consideration of the notice to show cause and the response, it appears to
the Court that:
(1) On December 1, 2025, Naomi Grant (“Mother”) filed this appeal from
a Family Court consent order, dated September 22, 2025, granting her joint legal
custody and visitation with her children. A timely appeal of the order would have
been filed by October 22, 2025. The Senior Court Clerk issued a notice directing
Mother to show cause why the appeal should not be dismissed as untimely. In her
1 The Court previously assigned pseudonyms to the parties under Supreme Court Rule 7(d). response, Mother stated that incorrect information about filing an appeal and her job
prevented her from filing a timely appeal.
(2) Time is a jurisdictional requirement.2 Unless an appellant can
demonstrate that the failure to file a timely notice of appeal is attributable to court-
related personnel, an untimely appeal cannot be considered.3 Mother contends that
she was provided with the incorrect paperwork for filing a timely appeal, but the
documents she submits in support of this claim are dated after the appeal deadline
expired. Mother has not shown that her failure to file a timely appeal is attributable
to court-related personnel. Consequently, this case does not fall within the exception
to the general rule that mandates the timely filing of a notice of appeal.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED, under Supreme Court Rules 29(b),
that this appeal is DISMISSED.
BY THE COURT:
/s/ Gary F. Traynor Justice
2 Carr v. State, 554 A.2d 778, 779 (Del. 1989). 3 Bey v. State, 402 A.2d 362, 363 (Del. 1979). 2
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Grant, Naomi v. Derek Tyson-Davis, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/grant-naomi-v-derek-tyson-davis-del-2026.