Rule V - Communication Within The Court Regarding The Resolution of Cases(1)Internal communications. Because the Supreme Court is a collegial body, the Justices typically endeavor to confer with each other simultaneously about cases, either in writing, by joint telephone conference, or in person. (2)Typical pre-submission communications. Before scheduled sittings, each Justice independently reviews the briefs and appendices unless specifically agreed otherwise in a given case. Neither the Justices nor their law clerks discuss the merits of a matter between chambers before oral argument or the date of submission for cases submitted on briefs. In particular situations, however, the Justices assigned to decide a case may determine it would be useful to confer in advance of oral argument or the date of submission of a case to be decided without argument on the briefs. For example, in an expedited case where a decision is required at or shortly after oral argument, the Justices may determine that it is advisable to circulate preliminary thoughts and key questions based on their reading of the briefs and record on appeal, so that the Justices can best prepare for oral argument, oral argument can be the most helpful to reaching a sound decision, and the Justices can issue their decision with the requisite speed. In these circumstances, all of the Justices assigned to decide a case should discuss the approach to communication and endeavor to reach consensus.
(3)Typical post-submission practices. After the primary responsibility to propose a resolution of a case has been assigned to a Justice, the Justices assigned to decide the case typically will consider any change in the agreed resolution of the case by communicating simultaneously with each other in writing or by an in-person or telephonic conference. In any situation where there is going to be a discussion that involves consideration of whether a Justice assigned to the matter will change her view as to the ultimate resolution of the appeal, the Court's tradition as a collegial, deliberative body counsels for the inclusion of all Justices assigned to the matter. Thus, if there is going to be a discussion of changing the resolution agreed upon at the decisional conference, all Justices assigned to the case should be included. (4)Post-submission conferences. The Court's general policy supporting discussions among all Justices assigned to hear a case does not mean, however, that the Justice assigned to draft a decision may not confer with a colleague to get that colleague's help during the drafting process, when that consultation only involves how to implement the decision reached by all of the Justices assigned to the case at conference. It is common in any business or law firm that everyone involved in a matter may not be able to confer at all times. Consistent with the Court's collegial tradition, collaboration to improve the quality of the Court's decisions is appropriate and an important part of its effectiveness as an appellate court.Del. Sup. Ct. Int. Opp. P. V
Adopted effective 6/18/2015