Del. C. » Title 10 — Organization, Powers, Jurisdiction and Operation of Courts · CHAPTER 5. Superior Court · Courts and Judicial Procedure
Delaware Code

10 Del. C. § 564 (2026)

Mandamus

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section DE-DELCdelcode.delaware.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Proceedings in mandamus shall be begun by the filing of a complaint in the Superior Court, upon which complaint a summons shall issue requiring the defendant to appear and file an answer within the time prescribed by the rules of the Court. Upon the filing of the answer either party may apply to the Court for hearing of the cause and the same may be heard by the Court at such time as may be ordered. The Court may make such orders respecting filing or hearing of interlocutory motions as shall be proper. Any questions of fact arising from the pleadings shall be heard and determined by the Court and if the Court orders that the plaintiff is entitled to the relief prayed for or any part thereof, a peremptory writ of mandamus shall issue forthwith which shall be served in the usual manner.

19 Del. Laws, c. 775, §  3;  Code 1915, §  3732;  34 Del. Laws, c. 213;  Code 1935, §  4282;  10 Del. C. 1953, §  564; 
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 31 cases (13 in the last 5 years), 1974–2024 · leading case: Snyder v. Andrews, 708 A.2d 237 (Del. 1998).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Snyder v. Andrews, 708 A.2d 237 (Del. 1998). “§ 4381 (adopted 1989), provides: (a) All sentences imposed for any offenses other than a life sentence imposed for class A felonies may be reduced by earned good time under the provisions of this section and rules and regulations adopted by the Commissioner of Corrections. (b)…”
Capital Educators Ass'n v. Camper, 320 A.2d 782 (Del. Ch. 1974). “§ 342 that the “Court of Chancery shall not have jurisdiction to determine any matter wherein sufficient remedy may be had by common law . . . before any other court or jurisdiction of this State”.”
Bd. of Managers of the Delaware Crim. Just. Info. Sys. v. Gannett Co., 847 A.2d 1123 (Del. Super. Ct. 2004). · cites it 2× “Introduction Gannett Company, t/a the News Journal (“News Journal”) filed this motion for a rule to show cause as to why a writ of mandamus pursuant to 10 Del. C. § 564 should not issue compelling the Delaware Criminal Justice System (“DELJIS”) to produce the fields of…”
Laub v. Danberg, 979 A.2d 1111 (Del. 2009). “1996); 10 Del. C. § 564. [4] Id. [5] In re Bordley, 545 A.”
Johnson v. State (Del. Super. Ct. 2020). · cites it 2× “Petitioner agreed to plead guilty to one count of Drug ' Pursuant to 10 Del. C. §564, the Petition for Writ of Mandamus should have been filed by separate complaint.”
Beeks v. Jennings (Del. Super. Ct. 2021). · cites it 2× “” 10 Del. C. § 564; “10 Del. C. § 564 provides for the issuance of a writ of mandamus.”
Reyek v. Albence (Del. Super. Ct. 2023). · cites it 2× “The Superior Court has statutory authority to issue writs of mandamus pursuant to 10 Del. C. § 564, and to compel agency action specifically pursuant to 29 Del.”
Chen v. Rodriguez-Velazquez (Del. Super. Ct. 2023). · cites it 2× “Petitioner now seeks a writ of mandamus pursuant to 10 Del. C. § 564. Petitioner asks this court to require the Justice of the Peace Court to reinstate National General, determine that defendant Jose Luis-Rodriguez was effectively served, enter summary judgment in Petitioner’s…”
Chen v. Rodriguez-Velazquez (Del. Super. Ct. 2023). · cites it 2× “Petitioner now seeks a writ of mandamus pursuant to 10 Del. C. § 564. Petitioner asks this court to require the Justice of the Peace Court to reinstate National General,8 determine that defendant Jose Luis Rodriguez-Velazquez was effectively served, enter summary judgment in…”
Winn v. Edinger (Del. 2016). “1996); 10 Del. C. § 564. 4 Id. 5 In re Bordley, 545 A.”
Boone & Trevor v. Dept. of Health & Soc. Servs. (Del. 2016). “§ 4914A(e)(2) makes it clear that, notwithstanding the other provisions of the statute, DHSS must exercise discretion in evaluating applications and must deny applications that fail to satisfy the statutory requirements and regulatory requirements established by DHSS.”
Brooks v. Lynch (Del. 2016). “§ 6501 and a writ of mandamus under 10 Del. C. § 564. Brooks sought a declaration that: (i) defendant Krafchick had engaged in fraud and misfeasance; (ii) defendant Lynch had violated Brooks’ statutory right to medical care under 11 Del.”
Show all 31 citing cases →
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.