Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Shahin v. Kent General Hospital

Superior Court of Delaware, Kent

January 23, 2014

NINA SHAHIN, CPA, Plaintiff,
v.
KENT GENERAL HOSPITAL, Defendant.

Submitted: September 19, 2013

Upon Consideration of Plaintiff's Motion for Relief Under Rule 60(b) DENIED

Nina Shahin, CPA., Pro Se.

ORDER

JAMES T. VAUGHN, PRESIDENT JUDGE

Upon consideration of plaintiff Nina Shahin, CPA's Motion For Relief Under Rule 60(b), it appears that:

1. The plaintiff seeks relief under Rule 60(b) from an order issued by the Court on August 9, 2013 denying her request to proceed In Forma Pauperis. The order denied her request to proceed In Forma Pauperis on the grounds that she had failed to disclose her husband's income and assets as required under 10 Del C. § 8802(b).

2. Under Superior Court Civil Rule 60(b) a judgment or order may be set aside by the trial court under specific circumstances or for "any other reason justifying relief from the operation of the judgment." Relief under Rule 60(b) is an extraordinary remedy that requires the movant to set out facts and circumstances that requires the Court to vacate a prior judgment.[1]

3. 10 Del. C. §8802(b) states, in pertinent part:

Before an individual shall be permitted to proceed . . . the individual must submit a sworn affidavit . . . . and shall provide complete information as to the affiant's identity, the nature, source and amount of all of the affiant's income, the affiant's spouse's income, all real and personal property owned by either individually or jointly, all cash or bank accounts held either individually or jointly, any dependents of the affiant and all debts and monthly expenses.

4. The plaintiff continues to fail to meet the statute's requirement that she disclose her husband's income and assets. Her argument that he refuses to provide such information is not sufficient to excuse compliance with the statute.

5. Accordingly, Shahin's Motion for Relief from Judgment is denied.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.