Murphy v. Murphy and Kravitz

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE SAMANTHA MAY MURPHY,1 §

§ No. 8, 2023 Respondent Below, Appellant, §

§ Court Below - Family Court v. § of the State of Delaware §

DYLAN MURPHY, § File No. CS22-04421 § Petition No. 22-05889 Petitioner Below, Appellee, §

§ and §

§

DONALD W. KRAVITZ and DAWN J. § File No. CS22-04760 KRAVITZ, § Petition No. 22-11838 §

Petitioners Below, Appellees. §

Submitted: July 21, 2023 Decided: August 29, 2023 Before TRAYNOR, LeGROW, and GRIFFITHS, Justices.

ORDER

After careful consideration of the parties’ briefs and the record on appeal, we conclude that the judgment below should be affirmed on the basis of the Family Court’s order dated January 4, 2023. The Family Court appropriately considered the best-interest factors set forth in 13 Del. C. § 722 in light of the evidence presented and acted within its broad discretion when deciding the custody and residential arrangements for the children.2 “Factual findings will not be disturbed on appeal unless they are clearly erroneous,” and [w]hen the determination of facts turns on a question of the credibility and the acceptance or rejection of the testimony of witnesses appearing before the trier of fact, we will not substitute our opinion for that of the trier of fact.”3 As to the appellant’s contention that the Family Court erroneously prevented her from presenting evidence, the record reflects that the Family Court gave the appellant significant latitude in presenting her case,4 and we discern no abuse of discretion in the Family Court’s evidentiary rulings.5 NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the judgment of the Family Court is AFFIRMED.

BY THE COURT:

/s/ Abigail M. LeGrow Justice