Title: Baker v. Ivory

State: delaware

Issuer: Delaware Supreme Court

Document:

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE 
 
DAMIAN AARON BAKER,1  
 
Petitioner Below- 
Appellant, 
 
v. 
 
STEPHANIE MADISON IVORY,  
 
          Respondent Below- 
Appellee. 
§ 
§  No. 259, 2011 
§ 
§ 
§  Court Below─Family Court 
§  of the State of Delaware 
§  in and for New Castle County 
§  File No. CN95-10271 
§  Petition No. 08-20087 
§ 
§ 
 
                                         Submitted: June 3, 2011 
 
 
 
 
   Decided: June 13, 2011 
 
Before HOLLAND, BERGER and JACOBS, Justices 
 
 
 
 
 
 
O R D E R  
 
 
This 13th day of June 2011, it appears to the Court that: 
 
(1) 
On May 19, 2011, the petitioner-appellant, Damian Aaron 
Baker, filed a notice of appeal from the Family Court’s April 27, 2011 order 
denying his motion for emergency ex parte relief.  On May 19, 2011, the 
Clerk of the Court issued a notice directing Baker to show cause why his 
appeal should not be dismissed for failure to comply with Supreme Court 
Rule 42 when taking an appeal from an apparent interlocutory order.2  Baker 
                                                 
1 The Court sua sponte assigned pseudonyms to the parties by Order dated May 19, 2011.  
Supr. Ct. R. 7(d). 
2 Supr. Ct. R. 29(b). 
 
2
filed a response on June 3, 2011, but did not address the issue of his failure 
to comply with Rule 42. 
 
(2) 
The Family Court’s April 27, 2011 order is an interlocutory, 
and not a final, order.3  Absent compliance with Rule 42, this Court has no 
jurisdiction to review an interlocutory order of the Family Court.4  Because 
the Court does not have jurisdiction over this matter, the appeal must be 
dismissed. 
 
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to Supreme Court 
Rule 29(b), that this appeal is DISMISSED. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
BY THE COURT: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
/s/ Carolyn Berger 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Justice 
 
 
                                                 
3 Stroud v. Milliken Enterprises, Inc., 552 A.2d 476, 481-82 (Del. 1989). 
4 Showell Poultry v. Delmarva Poultry Corp., 146 A.2d 794, 795-96 (Del. 1958).