Matter of Brown

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE IN THE MATTER OF THE PETITION OF DEVON ANTHONY BROWN FOR A WRIT OF PROHIBITION § § No. 183, 2013 § § Family Court No: CN95-10271 Submitted: April 26, 2013 Decided: June 10, 2013 Before STEELE, Chief Justice, HOLLAND and RIDGELY, Justices ORDER This 10th day of June 2013, it appears to the Court that: (1) The petitioner, Devon Anthony Brown, has filed a petition with this Court requesting the issuance of a writ of prohibition pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 43. Brown seeks to prohibit the Family Court from disclosing his residential address and his place of employment in connection with Family Court File Number CN95-10271. The Family Court judge assigned to that matter has responded to the petition by letter dated April 26, 2013. In the letter, the judge states that litigants can file a motion in the Family Court requesting that personal information be kept confidential, but that no such motion was filed in this case. (2) A writ of prohibition is the legal equivalent of the equitable remedy of injunction, which may be issued to prevent a trial court from exceeding the limits of its jurisdiction.1 Like a writ of mandamus, a writ of prohibition will not issue if the petitioner has another adequate remedy at law.2 (3) The record before us reflects that the petitioner had the option of filing a motion in the Family Court to keep personal information confidential, but did not do so. Because he had an adequate remedy in the Family Court, the petitioner is not entitled to the issuance of a writ of prohibition by this Court. Nor is there any evidence that the Family Court exceeded its jurisdiction in any respect. Therefore, the petition for a writ of prohibition must be dismissed. NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the petition for a writ of prohibition is DISMISSED. BY THE COURT: /s/ Myron T. Steele Chief Justice 1 2 In re Hovey, 545 A.2d 626, 628 (Del. 1988). Id. 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.