Bell v. Reed

Supreme Court of the State of Delaware · January 16, 2025 · No. 118, 2024

Summary

This is a per curiam order issued by the Supreme Court of the State of Delaware affirming the judgment of the Family Court. The lower court had previously affirmed a commissioner’s denial of the appellant’s motion to reopen protection-from-abuse proceedings. After reviewing the opening brief and the Family Court record, the Supreme Court found no reversible error and ordered the judgment below to be affirmed.

Court
Supreme Court of the State of Delaware
Writing for the Court
Seitz; Legrow; Griffiths
Jurisdiction
Delaware
Decision date
January 16, 2025
Docket number
118, 2024
Procedural posture
Appeal from Family Court order affirming denial of motion to reopen protection-from-abuse proceedings.
Precedential value
published
Parties
Samuel Bell v. Delaney Reed
Disposition
affirmed

Topics

family law procedurefamily law

Practice areas

family law

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the Family Court erred in denying the appellant's motion to reopen protection-from-abuse proceedings.

Holdings

  1. The judgment of the Family Court is affirmed.

Key quotations

After consideration of the opening brief and the Family Court record, we find it evident that the judgment below should be affirmed on the basis of and for the reasons cited by the Family Court in its March 1, 2024 order affirming a Family Court commissioner’s denial of the appellant’s motion to reopen protection-from-abuse proceedings.

Factual background

Samuel Bell sought to reopen protection-from-abuse proceedings. The Family Court commissioner denied the motion, and the Family Court affirmed that denial on March 1, 2024.

Procedural history

The Family Court denied appellant's motion to reopen protection-from-abuse proceedings; the Family Court commissioner issued the denial and the Family Court affirmed on March 1, 2024. The appellant appealed to the Supreme Court of Delaware.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…