Bunting v. Hudson

102 A. 982, 30 Del. 82, 7 Boyce 82, 1918 Del. LEXIS 15
CourtSuperior Court of Delaware
DecidedFebruary 6, 1918
DocketCertiorari No. 3
StatusPublished

This text of 102 A. 982 (Bunting v. Hudson) 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
Bunting v. Hudson, 102 A. 982, 30 Del. 82, 7 Boyce 82, 1918 Del. LEXIS 15 (Del. Ct. App. 1918).

Opinion

Boyce, J.:

Rev. Code 1915, §4028, requires every justice of the peace to set down in his docket, among other matters, “the cause of action’’ of every action commenced before him. The obvious purpose of the requirement is to reasonably inform the defendant of the nature and character of the demand which he is called on to meet or defend. The statement of the cause of action as “assumpsit for $16.08’’ does not so inform the defendant; for from such statement it does not appear whether the action is based on an express or implied promise, or contract, for the payment of money, delivery of produce, goods, wares or merchandise, or for personal labor, hire or service, or for any other cause of action within the jurisdiction of a justice of the peace. Crawford v. England, 2 Houst. 171; Guarantee Fund, etc., v. Henderson, 3 Pennewill, 159, 50 Atl. 535; Ralph,Adm’r., v. Pennel, 4 Houst. 542.

The judgment is reversed.

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

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
102 A. 982, 30 Del. 82, 7 Boyce 82, 1918 Del. LEXIS 15, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bunting-v-hudson-delsuperct-1918.