Paras v. Correctional Medial Services et al.

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE RICARDO M. PARAS, Plaintiff BelowAppellant, v. CORRECTIONAL MEDICAL SERVICES, DR. JAFRI, DR. IVENS, and DR. PENSERGA, Defendants BelowAppellees. § § § § § § § § § § § § § No. 370, 2001 Court Belowï£§Superior Court of the State of Delaware, in and for New Castle County C.A. No. 00C-08-104 Submitted: January 10, 2003 Decided: February 10, 2003 Before VEASEY, Chief Justice, WALSH and STEELE, Justices. ORDER This 10th day of February 2003, upon consideration of the Superior Court s report following remand and the parties supplemental briefing, it appears to the Court that: (1) After considering this appeal on the basis of the briefs and the record below, this Court concluded that we could not conduct a meaningful review of the Superior Court s judgment dismissing Paras complaint because the rationale for the judgment had been pronounced in open court and the tape of that proceeding was missing and had not been previously transcribed. Accordingly, we remanded the matter to the Superior Court to reconstruct at least that part of the missing transcript containing the rationale for its decision to dismiss the complaint. (2) The Superior Court issued its report following remand, which contains its factual findings and rulings of law. Upon consideration of the Superior Court s report and the parties supplemental memoranda, we find it manifest that the judgment of the Superior Court, which dismissed Paras complaint against the corporate and individual defendants for insufficient service of process, should be affirmed for the reasons set forth in the Superior Court s well-reasoned decision following remand. Paras did not present any evidence to support a finding that the person upon whom he served his complaint had authority to accept service of process for the defendants. The undisputed record, therefore, reflects that Paras did not properly serve any of the defendants within 120 days of filing his complaint. Accordingly, the Superior Court did not err in dismissing his complaint. NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the judgment of the Superior Court is AFFIRMED. BY THE COURT: _/s/ Myron T. Steele___________________ Justice 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.