Title: Ritchie v. Loring

State: delaware

Issuer: Delaware Supreme Court

Document:

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
EVERETT C. RITCHIE,
§
§
Respondent Below,
§
Appellant,
§ No. 604, 2001
§  
v.
§ Court Below: Family Court 
§ of the State of Delaware in and
JOCELYN W. LORING,
§ for New Castle County
§ File No. CN89-9565
Petitioner Below,
§ Petition Nos. 00-21227 & 00-22489
Appellee.
§
Submitted: May 7, 2002
Decided:
May 15, 2002
Before WALSH, HOLLAND, and BERGER, Justices.
O R D E R
This 15th day of May 2002, upon consideration of the briefs of the parties it
appears that:
(1)
This is an appeal from a decision of the Family Court that refused to
reopen a default judgment entered against the Appellant, Everett C. Ritchie, in a
custody proceeding.  The Appellant contends that the Family Court abused its
discretion in entering a default judgment because of Appellant’s failure to appear for
a deposition and his late appearance for trial.
(2)
While the Appellant’s conduct in this case reflects a casual attitude
toward the processes of the Family Court, and it is not to be condoned, after a full
review of the record, we conclude that the Family Court abused its discretion in
imposing the drastic sanction of dismissal where other less punitive sanctions were
available under Family Court Rule 37.  A default judgment is the ultimate sanction
for discovery violations and should be used sparingly.  In re Rinehardt, 575 A.2d
1079, 1083 (Del. 1990).  Moreover, we do not believe that Appellant’s tardiness
warrants a default judgment in a situation where, as here, the interests of a third
party, the child, are paramount.  Accordingly, we conclude that the Family Court
abused its discretion in failing to reopen the default judgment under Family Court
Rule 60(b).
(3)
The judgment of the Family court is REVERSED and this matter
REMANDED to that court for the entry of other appropriate sanctions for
Appellant’s conduct.  We expressly do not reach the merits of the underlying
custody dispute.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the judgment of the Family
Court be, and the same hereby is REVERSED and REMANDED.
BY THE COURT:
   s/Joseph T. Walsh
                 Justice