Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

985 A.2d 390

Foraker v. State

Supreme Court of Delaware

Decided December 4, 2009

Supreme Court of Delaware · decided 2009-12-04

Cited by 3 later decisions — most recently August 2016

2 district ·

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 2009-12-04

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

ROGER FORAKER, Defendant Below-Appellant,
v.
STATE OF DELAWARE, Plaintiff Below-Appellee.

No. 660, 2009.

¶1Supreme Court of Delaware.

Submitted: November 26, 2009.
Decided: December 4, 2009.

¶2

ORDER

¶3HENRY duPONT RIDGELY, Justice.

¶4This 4th day of December 2009, it appears to the Court that, on November 10, 2009, the Clerk issued a notice to show cause why this appeal should not be dismissed pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 29(b) on the ground that the Court lacks jurisdiction to consider an appeal directly from an order of a Commissioner of the Family Court.[1] The appellant has failed to respond to the notice to show cause within the required ten-day period. Dismissal of this action is, therefore, deemed to be unopposed.[2]

¶5NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the within appeal is DISMISSED.

NOTES

¶6[1] Del. Code Ann. tit. 10, §915(d).

¶7[2] Supr. Ct. R. 3(b) and 29(b).

/985/a2d/390 · .json · Public domain