In Re: NCC Sheriff

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE Charles E. Butler Leonard L. Williams Justice Center Resident Judge 500 North King Street, Suite 10400 Wilmington, Delaware 19801-3733 Telephone (302) 255-0656 September 16, 2020 Donald L. Gouge, Jr., Esquire Donald L. Gouge, Jr., LLC 800 N. King Street, Suite 303 Wilmington, DE 19899-1674 Re: New Castle County Sheriff Mr. Gouge: The Court has your letter dated September 1, 2020 as well as an accompanying Petition to postpone real estate auctions to be conducted by the New Castle County Sheriff and to allow future real estate auctions to be conducted online. Your motion further recites the well-known history of the global Covid-19 pandemic and the response of the State and the Delaware Supreme Court. Finally, your motion advises that the sheriff has cancelled previous scheduled sheriff’s sales and seeks approval of those cancellations nunc pro tunc. The Court understands from your Petition that the sheriff normally conducts court-ordered sheriff’s sales inside the County Council chambers in the City/County building, but the chambers have been closed due to the Covid-19 outbreak. Although the sheriff has sought out alternative sights, he seeks an Order from the Court authorizing the sheriff to conduct the auctions online. Perhaps in an effort to comfort the Court that such an Order is within the mainstream of the Court’s business, you quote Burge v. Fidelity Bond Mortg. Co. that the Court “has broad discretion in the supervision and review of sheriff’s sale[s]. 1 But as you know, the Burge case involved a clerical error in a bid, not the location of the bidding itself. As to the location, 10 Del. C. §4974 says that sheriff’s sales shall occur at the premises being sold or in a “public building” in the county seat. Thus, your query does not involve the Court’s exercise of discretion over the conduct of the sale, but rather seeks a Court ruling that interprets a statute of the General Assembly. 2 Without the benefit of other or contrary viewpoints, a ruling on this record would set precedent that would be difficult to overcome by a party wishing to contest your desired statutory interpretation. In other words, what you seek is an advisory opinion. The Court resolves controversies with the aid of 1 648 A.2d 414, 417 (Del. 1994) 2 Likewise, the citation to federal cases determining that an online auction satisfies the requirement of a “public sale” under a federal statute does little to advance the argument that the Court should interpret an online sale to satisfy the term “public building” in the Delaware Code. 2 competing viewpoints and arguments. The Court is not in the business of rendering general legal advice and doing so is disapproved.3 The Petition for a ruling that allows sheriff’s real estate auctions online must therefore be DENIED. This ruling is not on the merits of the argument and is without prejudice to the sheriff raising these arguments in a procedurally proper forum. IT IS SO ORDERED. Resident Judge Charles E. Butler 3 See generally Stroud v. Milliken Enterprises, Inc. 552 A.2d 476, 479-81 (Del. 1989) 3