Home/Superior Court of Delaware/Bell v. del Campo

Bell v. del Campo

105 A. 835, 30 Del. 288, 7 Boyce 288, 1919 Del. LEXIS 27
CourtSuperior Court of Delaware
DecidedMarch 25, 1919
DocketCertiorari No. 23
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 105 A. 835 (Bell v. del Campo) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Superior Court of Delaware primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Bell v. del Campo, 105 A. 835, 30 Del. 288, 7 Boyce 288, 1919 Del. LEXIS 27 (Del. Ct. App. 1919).

Opinion

Boyce, J.

[1] The court is of the opinion that the statement filed in this case is not in substantial compliance with the statute either in form or substance.

[2] The subletting of demised premises in violation of a stipulation in the lease not to sublet the same without the consent of the owner is not sufficient, in itself, to support the remedy afforded by the statute for forcible detainer.

The judgment below is reversed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Cook v. Carolina Freight Carriers Corp.
299 F. Supp. 192 (D. Delaware, 1969)
Harleysville Mutual Casualty Insurance v. Carroll
123 A.2d 128 (Superior Court of Delaware, 1956)
Anonymous v. Anonymous
85 A.2d 706 (Superior Court of Delaware, 1951)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
105 A. 835, 30 Del. 288, 7 Boyce 288, 1919 Del. LEXIS 27, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bell-v-del-campo-delsuperct-1919.