Case Title: McRae d/b/a McRae Enterprises v. Citizens Bank

Citation: 

Docket Number: 

State: delaware

Court: Delaware Supreme Court

Date: 2008-11-26T00:00:00Z

Document:
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE DEMARIUS D. McRAE d/b/a § McRAE ENTERPRISES, § No. 459, 2008 § Defendant Below, § Court Below—Superior Court Appellant, § of the State of Delaware in and § for Kent County v. § § CITIZENS BANK OF § PENNSYLVANIA, § § Plaintiff Below, § C.A. No. 08C-02-010 Appellee. § Submitted; September 25, 2008 Decided: November 26, 2008 Before STEELE, Chief Justice, HOLLAND and RIDGELY, Justices. O R D E R This 26th day of November 2008, it appears to the Court that: (1) On September 11, 2008, the defendant-below/appellant filed a notice of appeal from a Superior Court arbitrator’s order dated August 12, 2008.1 On September 12, 2008, the Clerk issued a notice directing that the appellant show cause why the appeal should not be dismissed for this Court’s lack of jurisdiction to consider an appeal from an arbitrator’s order.2 1 It appears from the Superior Court docket that the arbitrator’s order concerned plaintiff- below/appellee’s complaint filed on February 7, 2008. 2 See Del. Const. art. IV, § 11 (2007) (providing for jurisdiction of Supreme Court); Super. Ct. Civ. R. 16.1(k)(11)(C) (2007) (providing that an arbitration order shall not be 2 The appellant’s response to the notice to show cause does not address the Court’s lack of jurisdiction to consider his appeal. (2) An arbitrator’s order is not a final judgment for purposes of appeal to this Court.3 The sole remedy for any party in an action subject to arbitration is a demand for a trial de novo.4 NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 29(b), that the appeal is DISMISSED. BY THE COURT: /s/ Myron T. Steele Chief Justice subject to appeal) (repealed on Feb. 5, 2008, effective in civil actions filed after Mar. 1, 2008). 3 Redden v. McGill, 549 A.2d 695, 697-98 (Del. 1988). 4 Del. Super. Ct. Civ. R. 16.1(k)(11)(D); Williams v. Leager, 2003 WL 1857527 (Del. Supr.) (citing Redden v. McGill, 549 A.2d 695, 697-98 (Del. 1988)).