Butler v. Butler
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE GENTRY D. BUTLER, SR., Petitioner BelowAppellant, v. GENTRY BUTLER, JR. and GENEVA SINGLETARY, Respondents BelowAppellees. § § § § § § § § § § § § No. 524, 2001 Court Below Family Court of the State of Delaware, in and for Kent County File No. CK01-4295 CPI No. 01-26513 Submitted: December 3, 2001 Decided: December 10, 2001 Before HOLLAND, BERGER and STEELE, Justices ORDER This 10th day of December 2001, it appears to the Court that: (1) On October 18, 2001, this Court received a notice of appeal from petitioner-appellant Gentry D. Butler, Sr., from the decision of the Family Court dated October 17, 2001 vacating the Family Court s previous order dated September 28, 2001. (2) On October 19, 2001, the Clerk of this Court issued a notice pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 29(b) directing Butler to show cause why the appeal should not be dismissed for his failure to comply with Supreme Court Rule 42 when taking an appeal from an apparent interlocutory order. (3) On November 8, 2001, the notice to show cause was returned by the U.S. Post Office to the Clerk s Office with the notation Unclaimed. On that date, the notice was re-mailed to Butler via first class mail. (4) Gentry D. Butler, Sr., having failed to respond to the notice to show cause within the required 10-day period, dismissal of this action is deemed to be unopposed.1 NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to Supreme Court Rules 3(b) and 29(b), that the within appeal is DISMISSED. BY THE COURT: /s/ Carolyn Berger Justice 1 Supr. Ct. R. 3(b) (2); Supr. Ct. R. 30(c). -2-
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
