Title: Middlebrook v. Ayres

State: delaware

Issuer: Delaware Supreme Court

Document:

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE 
 
NIKERRAY MIDDLEBROOK, 
 
Plaintiff Below- 
Appellant, 
 
v. 
 
CAROLINE P. AYRES, 
 
Defendant Below- 
Appellee. 
§ 
§ 
§  No. 281, 2004 
§ 
§  Court Below—Superior Court 
§  of the State of Delaware, 
§  in and for New Castle County 
§  C.A. No. 02C-07-203 
§ 
§ 
§ 
 
 
 
 
 
Submitted: December 3, 2004 
 
 
 
 
  Decided: January 14, 2005 
 
Before STEELE, Chief Justice, HOLLAND, and RIDGELY, Justices. 
 
O R D E R 
 
This 14th day of January 2005, upon consideration of the opening brief 
and the State’s motion to affirm, it appears to the Court that: 
 
(1) 
The plaintiff-appellant, Nikerray Middlebrook, filed this appeal 
from the Superior Court’s dismissal of his complaint.  Middlebrook filed his 
complaint against his former attorney, Caroline Ayres, for legal malpractice, 
alleging that Ayres had failed to file a timely notice of appeal on his behalf 
from his criminal sentencing in June 1998.  The Superior Court granted 
Ayres’ motion to dismiss Middlebrook’s complaint on the alternative 
grounds that the complaint was barred by the three-year statute of limitations 
 
2
and that Middlebrook had failed to offer the required expert testimony to 
support his malpractice claim.   
(2) 
Having carefully considered the parties= respective positions, 
we find it manifest that the judgment of the Superior Court should be 
affirmed on the basis of the Superior Court=s well-reasoned decision dated 
June 9, 2004.  The Superior Court did not err in concluding that 
Middlebrook’s malpractice claim was barred by the applicable statute of 
limitations and that Middlebrook had failed to substantiate his claim with 
expert testimony.   
 
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the judgment of the 
Superior Court is AFFIRMED. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
BY THE COURT: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
/s/ Myron T. Steele 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Chief Justice