Case Title: Waldrop v. Bell

Citation: 

Docket Number: 108, 2019

State: delaware

Court: Delaware Supreme Court

Date: 2019-04-04T00:00:00Z

Document:
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE 
 
WYATT WALDROP,1 
 
 
Respondent Below, 
Appellant, 
 
v. 
 
PIPER BELL, 
 
Petitioner Below, 
Appellee. 
§ 
§  No. 108, 2019 
§ 
§ 
§ 
§  Court Below–Family Court 
§  of the State of Delaware 
§   
§  File No.         CN16-01555 
§  Petition No.   19-03991 
§ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Submitted: March 29, 2019 
 
 
 
 
Decided: 
April 4, 2019 
 
 
ORDER 
After careful consideration of the Notice to Show Cause, it appears to the 
Court that: 
(1) 
The appellant, Wyatt Waldrop, filed this appeal from a Family Court 
Commissioner’s February 27, 2019 order, which Waldrop describes in his notice of 
appeal as a protection from abuse order. The Senior Court Clerk issued a notice 
under Supreme Court Rule 29(b) directing Waldrop to show cause why his appeal 
                                                 
1 The Court previously assigned pseudonyms to the parties under Supreme Court Rule 7(d). 
 
2 
should not be dismissed for this Court’s lack of jurisdiction to consider an appeal 
from the decision of a Family Court Commissioner.2  
(2) 
Waldrop failed to respond to the Notice to Show Cause within the 
required ten-day period. Under these circumstances, dismissal of the appeal is 
deemed to be unopposed. 
 
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, under Supreme Court 
Rules 3(b)(2) and 26(b), that the appeal is DISMISSED. 
BY THE COURT: 
 
 
/s/ Collins J. Seitz, Jr. 
Justice 
                                                 
2 See Redden v. McGill, 549 A.2d 695, 698 (Del. 1988) (holding that findings and 
recommendations of masters that have not been subject to meaningful judicial review are not 
deemed final judgments appealable to this Court).