Background
This matter arose out of proceedings in the Delaware Court of Chancery (Case No. 2025-0892-SEM), which also involved a related Register of Wills proceeding (No. 190119 CRJ). Trina Lindsey, the defendant below, appealed to the Delaware Supreme Court while a Motion to Vacate under Court of Chancery Rule 60 (Docket No. 2025-0892 DG) remained pending in the lower court.
Lindsey filed a Motion for Remand in the Supreme Court seeking to return the matter to the Court of Chancery so that her Rule 60 motion could be decided on its merits. Appellee Shannon Cooper, proceeding pro se, filed no response to the remand motion. Justice Abigail LeGrow noted that, having received no opposition from the appellee, the motion was deemed unopposed.
The Court’s Holding
The Delaware Supreme Court granted Lindsey’s unopposed Motion for Remand and ordered the case remanded to the Court of Chancery for a determination of Lindsey’s Rule 60 Motion to Vacate on the merits. The Supreme Court expressly declined to retain jurisdiction over the matter following the remand.
Because the appellee did not respond to the remand motion, the court treated it as conceded and entered the order without substantive analysis of the underlying merits of the Rule 60 motion, leaving those issues for the Court of Chancery to resolve.
Key Takeaways
- The Delaware Supreme Court remanded the case to the Court of Chancery solely for the purpose of adjudicating Lindsey’s pending Rule 60 Motion to Vacate on the merits.
- The Supreme Court did not retain jurisdiction, meaning any further appellate review would require a new appeal after the Chancery Court rules.
- An appellee’s failure to respond to a motion in the Delaware Supreme Court can result in the motion being deemed unopposed and granted without further analysis.
Why It Matters
This order illustrates Delaware’s practice of remanding matters to the Court of Chancery when a dispositive post-judgment motion — here, a Rule 60 motion to vacate — remains unresolved below. Practitioners should be aware that filing an appeal does not automatically moot or bypass pending Chancery Court motions, and that coordinating the timing of appeals with lower-court post-judgment practice is essential.
The order also serves as a reminder of the procedural consequence of failing to respond to motions in Delaware appellate proceedings. A pro se or represented party who does not oppose a remand motion risks having the court treat the motion as conceded, accelerating a return to the trial court level without the benefit of appellate briefing on the underlying issues.