Court Opinion

ID: 9555594
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-14 16:04:18.293254+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:39:15.119877
License: Public Domain

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE

    MYLES SHAW,1                               §
                                               §
          Respondent Below,                    § No. 270, 2023
          Appellant,                           §
                                               § Court Below—Family Court
          v.                                   § of the State of Delaware
                                               §
    DIVISION OF CHILD SUPPORT                  § File No. CK21-01585
    SERVICES/CLARE PAYNE Y                     § Petition No. 22-24383
    PAYNE,                                     §
                                               §
          Petitioner Below,                    §
          Appellee.                            §

                               Submitted: August 10, 2023
                               Decided:   August 11, 2023

Before SEITZ, Chief Justice; LeGROW and GRIFFITHS, Justices.

                                        ORDER

         After consideration of the notice to show cause and the response, it appears to

the Court that:

         (1)    On August 4, 2023, the appellant, Myles Shaw, filed this appeal from a

Family Court Commissioner’s order, dated July 20, 2023, requiring him to pay child

support. The Senior Court Clerk issued a notice directing Shaw to show cause why

this appeal should not be dismissed for this Court’s lack of jurisdiction to consider

an appeal directly from a Family Court Commissioner’s order.

1
    The Court previously assigned pseudonyms to the parties under Supreme Court Rule 7(d).
       (2)     In his response to the notice to show cause, Shaw challenges the merits

of the order on appeal. He does not address the jurisdictional defect.

       (3)     A party’s right to appeal from a Commissioner’s order is to a judge of

the Family Court.2 This Court lacks jurisdiction to consider an appeal directly from

a Family Court Commissioner’s order.3 This appeal must therefore be dismissed.

       NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED, under Supreme Court Rule 29(b),

that this appeal is DISMISSED.

                                             BY THE COURT:

                                             /s/ N. Christopher Griffiths
                                                    Justice

2
  10 Del. C. § 915(d) (providing that a party may appeal a final or interim order of a Family Court
Commissioner to a Family Court judge within 30 days of the Commissioner’s order); Family Court
Civil Rule 53.1(a), (b) (same).
3
  See, e.g., Clark v. Cook, 2023 WL 1809031, at *1 (Del. Feb. 7, 2023) (dismissing appeal from
Family Court Commissioner’s order for lack of jurisdiction); Wilson v. Div. of Child Support
Servs./Ridgeway, 2021 WL 5028375, at *1 (Del. Oct. 28, 2021) (same).

                                                2