Title: Huff et al. v. Hooper et al.

State: delaware

Issuer: Delaware Supreme Court

Document:

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE 
 
RONALD HUFF and SHAMSIDIN 
ALI a/k/a ROBERT SAUNDERS, 
 
Petitioners Below, 
Appellants, 
 
v. 
 
DR. MICHAEL HOOPER, RANDY 
PARKER, WARDEN RICK 
KEARNEY and COMMISSIONER 
STANLEY TAYLOR, 
 
Respondents Below, 
Appellees. 
§ 
§  No. 43, 2003 
§ 
§ 
§ 
§ 
§  Court Below—Superior Court 
§  of the State of Delaware, 
§  in and for New Castle County 
§  C.A. No. 02M-08-002 
§ 
§ 
§ 
§ 
§ 
 
O R D E R 
 
This 13th day of June 2003, it appears to the Court that, on May 21, 2003, the 
Clerk issued a notice to show cause why this appeal should not be dismissed pursuant 
to Supreme Court Rule 29(b) for appellants’ failure to diligently prosecute the appeal 
by not filing their opening brief and appendix.  Appellants have failed to respond to 
the notice to show cause within the required ten-day period; therefore, dismissal of 
this action is deemed to be unopposed. 
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, pursuant to Supreme Court 
Rules 3(b) and 29(b), that the within appeal is DISMISSED. 
BY THE COURT: 
 
/s/ Randy J. Holland 
Justice