Case Title: Nevins v. Bryan, et al.

Citation: 

Docket Number: 60, 2006

State: delaware

Court: Delaware Supreme Court

Date: 2006-05-18T00:00:00Z

Document:
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE 
 
RAPHAEL F. NEVINS, 
 
Plaintiff Below- 
Appellant, 
 
v. 
 
GEORGE 
BRYAN, 
DEAN 
WHITLA, WILLIAM SCHULER, 
CAROLYN 
TINKER, 
VICKI 
IRVING, and THE CENTER FOR 
THE 
ADVANCEMENT 
OF 
DISTANCE 
EDUCATION 
IN 
RURAL AMERICA, a corporation, 
 
Defendants Below- 
Appellees. 
§ 
§  No.  60, 2006 
§ 
§ 
§ 
§ 
§ 
§  Court Below—Superior Court 
§  of the State of Delaware, 
§  in and for Sussex County 
§  C.A. No. 05C-07-041 
§ 
§ 
§ 
§ 
§ 
§ 
 
 
 
 
 
Submitted: March 27, 2006 
 
 
 
 
  Decided: May 18, 2006 
 
Before STEELE, Chief Justice, HOLLAND, and RIDGELY, Justices. 
 
O R D E R 
 
 
This 18th day of May 2006, upon consideration of the appellant’s 
opening brief and the appellee’s motion to affirm, the Court finds it manifest 
on the face of the opening brief that the appeal is without merit under 
Supreme Court Rule 25(a).  The Superior Court did not err in dismissing 
Nevins’ complaint for failure to state a claim for malicious prosecution.  
Accordingly, we conclude that the judgment below should be affirmed on 
the basis of, and for the reasons stated in, the Superior Court’s decision 
 
2
dated September 8, 2005 and its order denying reargument dated January 5, 
2006.   
 
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the judgment of the 
Superior Court is AFFIRMED. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
BY THE COURT: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
/s/ Myron T. Steele 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Chief Justice