Waldrop v. Bell

Opinion

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE

WYATT WALDROP,1 § § No. 108, 2019

Respondent Below, § Appellant, § §

v. § Court Below–Family Court § of the State of Delaware PIPER BELL, § § File No. CN16-01555 Petitioner Below, § Petition No. 19-03991 Appellee. §

Submitted: March 29, 2019 Decided: April 4, 2019

ORDER

After careful consideration of the Notice to Show Cause, it appears to the Court that:

(1) The appellant, Wyatt Waldrop, filed this appeal from a Family Court Commissioner’s February 27, 2019 order, which Waldrop describes in his notice of appeal as a protection from abuse order. The Senior Court Clerk issued a notice under Supreme Court Rule 29(b) directing Waldrop to show cause why his appeal

1 The Court previously assigned pseudonyms to the parties under Supreme Court Rule 7(d).

should not be dismissed for this Court’s lack of jurisdiction to consider an appeal from the decision of a Family Court Commissioner.2 (2) Waldrop failed to respond to the Notice to Show Cause within the required ten-day period. Under these circumstances, dismissal of the appeal is deemed to be unopposed.

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, under Supreme Court Rules 3(b)(2) and 26(b), that the appeal is DISMISSED.

BY THE COURT:

/s/ Collins J. Seitz, Jr.

Justice

2 See Redden v. McGill, 549 A.2d 695, 698 (Del. 1988) (holding that findings and recommendations of masters that have not been subject to meaningful judicial review are not deemed final judgments appealable to this Court).