Supreme Court of Delaware, 2018

Baines v. Hunter

Supreme Court of Delaware · Decided May 22, 2018 · Valihura J.

Opinion

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE SETH BAINES,1 §

§ No. 526, 2017 Respondent/Petitioner Below, §

Appellant, § Court Below—Family Court § of the State of Delaware v. §

§ File No. CN11-02650 JENNIFER T. HUNTER, § Petition Nos. 17-30157 § and 17-30452 Petitioner/Respondent Below, §

Appellee. §

Submitted: March 23, 2018 Decided: May 22, 2018

Before STRINE, Chief Justice; VALIHURA and VAUGHN, Justices.

ORDER

This 22nd day of May 2018, upon consideration of the parties’ briefs and the record below, the Court concludes that the November 14, 2017 Family Court order granting the petitioner/respondent below-appellee’s petition for a rule to show cause should be affirmed. To the extent the respondent/petitioner below-appellant claims that the Family Court disregarded the evidence he offered or disputes the Family Court’s factual findings, we cannot review those claims in the absence of a transcript of the November 7, 2017 rule to show cause hearing.2 The appellant has not provided a transcript of the November 7, 2017 rule to show cause hearing.

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the judgment of the Family Court is AFFIRMED.

BY THE COURT: /s/Karen L. Valihura Justice

1 The Court previously assigned pseudonyms to the parties under Supreme Court Rule 7(d). 2 Supr. Ct. R. 14(e) (requiring that “the appellant's appendix shall contain such portions of the trial transcript as are necessary to give this Court a fair and accurate account of the context in which the claim of error occurred and must include a transcript of all evidence relevant to the challenged finding or conclusion”); Tricoche v. State, 525 A.2d 151, 154 (Del. 1987) (holding the burden is on the appellant to produce parts of the trial transcript that are necessary to give the Court the context of the claim).

Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.