You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

Davis v. Department of Correction

Citation: Not availableDocket: 276, 2016

Court: Supreme Court of Delaware; January 2, 2017; Delaware; State Supreme Court

Original Court Document: View Document

Narrative Opinion Summary

Ronald Davis appealed a decision from the Superior Court of Delaware, which dismissed his petition for a writ of mandamus due to his failure to pay a $75 filing fee. On October 10, 2016, the Supreme Court issued a notice for Davis to explain why the appeal should not be dismissed for not diligently prosecuting it, specifically regarding the non-payment of the Superior Court’s record preparation fee. In response, Davis acknowledged an unspecified error in the Superior Court and requested a remand to correct this error. He filed a motion to remand on November 4, 2016. However, the Supreme Court found insufficient grounds to remand the case, noting that Davis provided no explanation for his failure to pay the required fee. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed for lack of diligent prosecution. The order was issued by Chief Justice Leo E. Strine, Jr. on January 3, 2017.

Legal Issues Addressed

Dismissal for Failure to Pay Filing Fee

Application: The appellant's failure to pay the required filing fee resulted in the dismissal of his petition for a writ of mandamus by the Superior Court.

Reasoning: Ronald Davis appealed a decision from the Superior Court of Delaware, which dismissed his petition for a writ of mandamus due to his failure to pay a $75 filing fee.

Dismissal for Lack of Diligent Prosecution

Application: The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal because the appellant did not pay the record preparation fee and failed to provide a sufficient explanation for this omission.

Reasoning: The Supreme Court found insufficient grounds to remand the case, noting that Davis provided no explanation for his failure to pay the required fee.

Motion to Remand

Application: The appellant's motion to remand the case was denied due to lack of merit and insufficient justification for the remand.

Reasoning: He filed a motion to remand on November 4, 2016. However, the Supreme Court found insufficient grounds to remand the case.