Opinion

Brown v. Brown

Court
Supreme Court of Delaware
Filed
Dec 21, 2021
Status
Published
On the bench
Valihura J.
Cited by
0 cases
Authority
More cited than 22.3%

The opinion

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE

CORA BROWN,1 §

§ No. 372, 2021

Petitioner Below, §

Appellant, § Court Below—Family Court of

§ the State of Delaware

v. §

§ File No. CN96-11425

CHASE BROWN, § Petition No. 20-22569

§

Respondent Below, §

Appellee. §

Submitted: December 2, 2021

Decided: December 21, 2021

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

ORDER

Upon consideration of the notice to show cause and the appellant’s response,

it appears to the Court that:

(1) On November 22, 2021, the appellant, Cora Brown, filed a notice of

appeal from a Family Court order dated October 18, 2021 and docketed on October

19, 2021. A timely notice of appeal was due in this Court by November 18, 2021.2

The Senior Court Clerk issued a notice directing Brown to show cause why this

appeal should not be dismissed as untimely filed. In her response to the notice to

1

The Court assigns pseudonyms to the parties under Supreme Court Rule 7(d).

2

Supr. Ct. R. 6(a)(i).

show cause, Brown argues the merits of her appeal, but does not address the

untimeliness of her appeal in this Court.

(2) Time is a jurisdictional requirement.3 A notice of appeal must be

received by the Court within the applicable time period in order to be effective.4 An

appellant’s pro se status does not excuse a failure to comply strictly with the

jurisdictional requirements.5 Unless an appellant can demonstrate that the failure to

file a timely notice of appeal is attributable to court-related personnel, this Court

cannot consider an untimely appeal.6

(3) Brown has not demonstrated that her failure to file a timely notice of

appeal of the Family Court order 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. The appeal must be dismissed.

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

that this appeal is DISMISSED.

BY THE COURT:

/s/ Karen L. Valihura

Justice

3

Carr v. State, 554 A.2d 778, 779 (Del.1989).

4

Supr. Ct. R. 10(a).

5

Ward v. Taylor, 2019 WL 4784943, at *1 (Del. Sept. 30, 2019); Smith v. State, 47 A.3d 481, 486-

87 (Del. 2012).

6

Ward, 2019 WL 4784943, at *1; Bey v. State, 402 A.2d 362, 363 (Del. 1979).

2

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.