Title: Alston v. Delaware State University, et al.
Citation: N/A
Docket Number: 391, 2012
State: Delaware
Issuer: Delaware Supreme Court
Date: July 31, 2012

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE 
 
ESHED ALSTON,  
 
Plaintiff Below- 
Appellant, 
 
v. 
 
DELAWARE STATE 
UNIVERSITY, et al.,  
 
           Defendants Below- 
Appellees. 
§ 
§  No. 391, 2012 
§ 
§ 
§  Court Below─Superior Court 
§  of the State of Delaware 
§  in and for Kent County 
§  C.A. No. 10C-10-026 
§ 
§ 
§ 
§ 
 
                                         Submitted: July 27, 2012 
 
 
 
 
   Decided:  July 31, 2012 
 
Before STEELE, Chief Justice, HOLLAND and BERGER, Justices 
 
 
 
 
 
 
O R D E R  
 
 
This 31st day of July 2012, it appears to the Court that: 
 
(1) 
On July 17, 2012, the Court received the appellant’s notice of 
appeal from the Superior Court’s order dismissing his complaint, which was 
dated and entered upon the docket on March 31, 2011.1  Pursuant to 
Supreme Court Rule 6, a timely notice of appeal from the March 31, 2011 
order should have been filed on or before May 2, 2011.2 
                                                 
1 The appellant also appeals from the Superior Court’s September 29, 2011 orders 
denying his motion for reargument, his motion for relief from judgment and his motion 
for sanctions. 
2 A timely notice of appeal from the Superior Court’s September 29, 2011 orders should 
have been filed on or before October 31, 2011. 
 
2
 
(2) 
On July 17, 2012, the Clerk issued a notice pursuant to 
Supreme Court Rule 29(b) directing the appellant to show cause why his 
appeal should not be dismissed as untimely filed.  The appellant filed his 
response to the notice to show cause on July 27, 2012.  In his response, 
which he entitles a motion for a continuance, the appellant states that he has 
four pending lawsuits and needs at least thirty days to “get all these things in 
proper order.”  The appellant provides no other explanation for his untimely 
notice of appeal. 
 
(3) 
Pursuant to Rule 6(a) (i), a notice of appeal in a civil matter 
must be filed within thirty days after entry upon the docket of the judgment 
or order being appealed.  Time is a jurisdictional requirement.3  A notice of 
appeal must be received by the Office of the Clerk of the Court within the 
applicable time period in order to be effective.4  An appellant’s pro se status 
does not excuse a failure to comply strictly with the jurisdictional 
requirements of Rule 6.5  Unless the appellant can demonstrate that the 
failure to file a timely notice of appeal is attributable to court-related 
personnel, his appeal may not be considered.6 
                                                 
3 Carr v. State, 554 A.2d 778, 779 (Del. 1989). 
4 Supr. Ct. R. 10(a). 
5 Carr v. State, 554 A.2d at 779. 
6 Bey v. State, 402 A.2d 362, 363 (Del. 1979). 
 
3
 
(4) 
There is nothing in the record before us reflecting that the 
appellant’s failure to file a timely notice of appeal in this case is attributable 
to court-related personnel.  Consequently, this case does not fall within the 
exception to the general rule that mandates the timely filing of a notice of 
appeal.  Thus, the Court concludes that this appeal must be dismissed. 
 
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to Supreme Court 
Rule 29(b), that this appeal is DISMISSED.7 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
BY THE COURT: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
/s/ Randy J. Holland 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Justice 
 
 
                                                 
7 The appellant’s four additional documents filed in the Court on July 27, 2012 are hereby 
STRICKEN.  Supr. Ct. R. 34.