Cunningham v. Federal National Mortgage Association JP Morgan Chase
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE JOSEPH A. CUNNINGHAM, JR., Defendant Below, Appellant, v. FEDERAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOCIATION JP MORGAN CHASE, Plaintiff Below, Appellee. § § § § § § § § § § § § § No. 492, 2016 Court Below—Superior Court of the State of Delaware C.A. No. N12L-11-093 Submitted: October 17, 2016 Decided: January 6, 2017 Before STRINE, Chief Justice; VAUGHN, and SEITZ, Justices. ORDER This 6th day of January 2017, having considered the appellant’s response to the Clerk’s notice to show cause, it appears to the Court that: (1) Joseph A. Cunningham, Jr. filed this appeal from the Superior Court’s order of September 14, 2016, granting a motion to amend a complaint in a mortgage foreclosure action filed by JPMorgan Chase Bank. The Clerk issued a notice directing Cunningham to show cause why the appeal should not be dismissed for his failure to comply with Supreme Court Rule 42 when filing an appeal from an apparent interlocutory order. Absent compliance with Rule 42, this Court has no jurisdiction to consider an interlocutory appeal.1 (2) In his response to the notice to show cause, Cunningham takes issue with the Superior Court’s order of September 14, 2016, and he raises other defenses and claims related to the underlying mortgage foreclosure action. Cunningham does not address the jurisdictional issue raised in the notice to show cause. (3) Absent compliance with Rule 42, this Court’s appellate jurisdiction is limited to the review of a trial court’s final judgment. A judgment is final for purposes of appeal when it disposes of all justiciable matters.2 In this case, the Superior Court’s order of September 14, 2016 was not the final judgment in the mortgage foreclosure action. Under these circumstances, Cunningham’s appeal must be dismissed. NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that this appeal is DISMISSED under Supreme Court Rules 29(b) and 42. BY THE COURT: /s/ Collins J. Seitz, Jr. Justice 1 2 Julian v. State, 440 A.2d 990 (Del. 1982). J.I. Kislak Mortg. Corp. v. William Matthews, Builder, Inc., 303 A.2d 648, 650 (Del. 1973). 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.
