# Brown v. Brown

> Supreme Court of Delaware · December 21, 2021

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/5139691

## Case

- **Court:** Supreme Court of Delaware
- **Decided:** December 21, 2021
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Opinion
- **Judges:** Valihura J.
- **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/5139691

## Opinion text

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

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/5139691. Public record. Not legal advice.