Title: Matter of Proctor

State: delaware

Issuer: Delaware Supreme Court

Document:

1The Court has not considered Proctor’s “Motion for Rule 43(b)(v) and Rule 9(c)”
that was filed on November 7, 2001, in response to the State’s answer and motion to
dismiss.  See Supr.  Ct.  R.  43(b)(ii) (providing that, other than the respondent’s answer
to the petitioner’s complaint, “unless the Court otherwise directs, no further submissions
of the parties shall be accepted.”).
2Proctor v.  Kearney, et al., Super.  Ct., C.A. No.  01M-07-005, Bradley, J.
(Oct. 31, 2001); Proctor v.  Beck, et al., Super.  Ct., C.A. No.  01M-08-018, Bradley,
J.  (Oct. 31, 2001).
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
IN THE MATTER OF THE 
§
PETITION OF RONALD E.  
§
No.  458, 2001
PROCTOR FOR A WRIT OF
§
MANDAMUS.
§
Submitted: October 30, 2001
Decided:
November 19, 2001
Before VEASEY, Chief Justice, WALSH and STEELE, Justices.
O R D E R
This 19th day of November 2001, the Court has considered the petition
for a writ of mandamus filed by Ronald E.  Proctor, and the answer and
motion to dismiss filed by the State of Delaware.1  Proctor’s mandamus
petition seeks to compel the Superior Court to act upon two mandamus
petitions that Proctor filed on July 9, 2001 and August 27, 2001.  By orders
dated October 31, 2001, the Superior Court dismissed Proctor’s mandamus
petitions.2  In view of the Superior Court’s October 31 orders, Proctor’s
petition for a writ of mandamus in this Court is moot.
2
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the petition for a writ of
mandamus is DISMISSED as moot.
BY THE COURT:
s/Joseph T. Walsh        
Justice