Title: Hedenberg v. Raber, et al.
Citation: N/A
Docket Number: 621, 2005
State: Delaware
Issuer: Delaware Supreme Court
Date: June 19, 2006

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE 
 
HELKA HEDENBERG, 
 
 
Plaintiff Below- 
Appellant, 
 
v. 
 
TROY D. RABER, BETHANY M. 
RABER, LISA M. ANDERSON, 
ESQUIRE, JOE WELLS, and 
HARRINGTON ERA REALTY, 
INC., 
 
Defendants Below- 
Appellees. 
§ 
§ 
§  No. 621, 2005 
§ 
§ 
§  Court Below—Superior Court 
§  of the State of Delaware, 
§  in and for Kent County 
§  C.A. No. 05C-03-038 
§ 
§ 
§ 
§ 
§   
§ 
 
 
 
 
 
Submitted: April 12, 2006 
 
 
 
 
  Decided: June 19, 2006 
 
Before BERGER, JACOBS, Justices and LAMB, Vice Chancellor.1 
 
O R D E R 
 
This 19th day of June 2006, after careful consideration of appellant’s 
opening brief, Joe Wells and Harrington ERA Realty, Inc.’s motion to 
affirm, and the record below, we find it manifest that the judgment of the 
Superior Court should be affirmed on the basis of, and for the reasons set 
forth in, the Superior Court=s well-reasoned decision dated November 14, 
2005. The Superior Court’s dismissal of the complaint below was controlled 
                                                 
1 Sitting by designation pursuant to Art. IV, § 12 of the Delaware Constitution and 
Delaware Supreme Court Rules 2 and 4. 
 
2
by settled Delaware law.  The Superior Court did not err or abuse its 
discretion in dismissing the complaint, which was appellant’s second, for 
failing to state a claim, insufficiency of process and insufficiency of service 
of process.  
 
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the judgment of the 
Superior Court is AFFIRMED. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
BY THE COURT: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
/s/ Carolyn Berger 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Justice