Case Title: Roundtree v. Danielson

Citation: 

Docket Number: 18-2017

State: delaware

Court: Delaware Supreme Court

Date: 2017-09-28T00:00:00Z

Document:
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE

RICHARD ROUNDTREE,! §
§ No. 18,2017
Petitioner Below, §
Appellant, § Court Below-Family Court
§ ofthe State of Delaware
v. § _ inand for New Castle County
§
SHARON DANIELSON, § File No. CN14-06176
§ Petition No. 15-06178
Respondent Below, §
Appellee §

‘Submitted: September 20, 2017
Decided: September 28, 2017

 

Before VAUGHN, SEITZ, and TRAYNOR, Justices.
ORDER

This 28" day of September 2017, having considered the briefs and the record
below, it appears to the Court that:

(1) The orders of the Family Court awarding alimony to Sharon Danielson
should be affirmed on the basis of and for the reasons assigned in its orders dated
November 9, 2016? and December 16, 2016.

(2) The Family Court’s findings of fact are supported by the record, its

decisions reflect due consideration of the statutory factors found in Section 1512, its

2 The Court assigned pseudonyms to the parties pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 7(4).
2 [Roundtree] v. [Danielson], No. 15-06178 (Del. Fam. Nov. 9, 2016).
» {Roundtree} v. [Danielson], No. 15-06178 (Del. Fam. Dec. 16, 2016)

1
explanations, deductions and inferences are the product of a logical and deductive
reasoning process and, to the extent there are slight deviations between the record
and the Family Court’s findings regarding the parties’ monthly expenses, they do
hot warrant reversal.

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the judgment of the Family
Court is hereby AFFIRMED.

BY THE COURT:

(sl Gary F. Traynor

Justice