IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE

MATTHEW JONES, § § No. 144, 2025 Plaintiff Below, § Appellant, § Court Below—Superior Court of § the State of Delaware v. § § C.A. No. S25C-03-019 SUSSEX COUNTY SUPERIOR § COURT, § § Defendant Below, § Appellee. § Submitted: June 6, 2025 Decided: July 18, 2025 Before SEITZ, Chief Justice; VALIHURA and TRAYNOR, Justices.

ORDER After consideration of the opening brief and the record on appeal, we conclude that the Superior Court’s order dismissing appellant Matthew Jones’s complaint should be affirmed sua sponte.1 In the complaint, Jones alleged that he was entitled to damages because Superior Court employees ended his life by repeatedly raping and shooting him in 2001.2 The Superior Court dismissed the complaint as factually

Del. Supr. Ct. R. 25(c) (“After filing of the appellant's opening brief, a panel of the Court by unanimous action may, sua sponte, enter an order or opinion affirming the judgment or order of the trial court for the reason that it is manifest on the face of the appellant’s opening brief that the appeal is without merit ....”).

Jones filed a similar complaint that the Superior Court dismissed as legally and factually frivolous in May 2025. Jones v. Kent Cnty. Superior Ct., 2025 WL 1420241 (Del. Super. Ct. May 16, 2025). frivolous under 10 Del. C. § 8803(b). It is manifest from Jones’s opening brief, which relies on inapplicable federal statutes and makes factually frivolous claims, that his appeal is without merit and that the Superior Court did not err in dismissing his complaint.

We previously warned Jones that if he continued to file frivolous lawsuits and appeals, he would be enjoined from filing appeals in this Court without first seeking leave of the Court.3 We now conclude that Jones’s frivolous filings constitute an abuse of the judicial process. Thus, the Clerk of this Court is directed to refuse any future appeal Jones files from a Superior Court order dismissing a complaint he files as factually frivolous, legally frivolous, or malicious, unless the appeal is accompanied by the required filing fee or a completed motion to proceed in forma pauperis with a sworn affidavit containing the certifications required by 10 Del. C.

§ 8803(e) and that motion is granted by the Court.

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

BY THE COURT:

/s/Karen L. Valihura Justice

Jones v. Connections CSP, 2020 WL 5269017, at *1 (Del. Sept. 1, 2020); Jones v. Hay, 2020 WL 4530293, at *1 (Del. Aug. 4, 2020).