Opinion
Docket No. 507, 1998.
May 17, 1999.
Appeal from Family Court, New Castle County, CN97-11624.
AFFIRMED.
Unpublished Opinion is below.
BAHEG T. BISTAWROS, Respondent-Below, Appellant, v. KAREN D. BISTAWROS, Petitioner-Below, Appellee. No. 507, 1998. Supreme Court of Delaware. Submitted: May 11, 1999. Decided: May 17, 1999.
Court Below: Family Court of the State of Delaware, in and for New Castle County, File No. CN97-11624.
Before VEASEY, Chief Justice, HOLLAND and HARTNETT, Justices.
ORDER
This 17th day of May 1999, upon consideration of the briefs of the parties, it appears to the Court that:
1. On November 30, 1998, the appellant, Baheg T. Bistawros ("Mr. Bistawros") appealed pro se the Order of the Family Court dated October 27, 1998 that granted, in part, Mrs. Bistawros' motion for attorney fees and costs. The award of attorney fees and costs was clearly within the discretion of the Family Court judge and the Court, therefore, committed no error in making the award.
2. In an amended notice of appeal filed on December 15, 1998, Mr. Bistawros appealed seven other orders of the Family Court entered between February 2, 1998 and November 29, 1998.
3. The February 2, 1998 Order of the Family Court that denied Mr. Bistawros' motion to disqualify the judge was clearly without merit. Mr. Bistawros failed to adduce any evidence that the judge had any valid grounds to disqualify himself. Los v. Los, Del. Supr., 595 A.2d 381 (1991).
4. Upon careful review of the record, we have determined that the opinion and order of the Family Court dated September 10, 1998, awarding legal and residential custody of the three children of the parties to Mrs. Bistawros, subject to the right of visitation by Mr. Bistawros, should be affirmed for the reasons set forth in the well-reasoned opinion of the Family Court.
5. As to the other orders appealed, we have determined that: to the extent the issues raised on appeal are factual, the record evidence supports the trial judge's factual findings; to the extent the errors alleged on appeal are attributed to an abuse of discretion, the record does not support those assertions; and to the extent that the issues raised on appeal are legal, they are controlled by settled Delaware law, which was properly applied. Therefore, we have concluded that the judgment of the Family Court should be affirmed.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the judgment of the Family Court be, and the same hereby is,
AFFIRMED.
BY THE COURT:
s/ Maurice A. Hartnett, III, Justice