Bupp v. Veasey

100 A. 327, 29 Del. 366, 6 Boyce 366, 1917 Del. LEXIS 7
CourtSuperior Court of Delaware
DecidedMarch 28, 1917
DocketNo. 182
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 100 A. 327 (Bupp v. Veasey) 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
Bupp v. Veasey, 100 A. 327, 29 Del. 366, 6 Boyce 366, 1917 Del. LEXIS 7 (Del. Ct. App. 1917).

Opinion

Boyce, J.,

delivering the opinion of the court:

This is an action in debt for double the value of property dis-trained and sold for rent demanded when no rent was in arrear, contrary to Rev. Code 1915, §4571, which section is applicable only to property distrainable.

The action can only be maintained by the tenant, or by a person whose property is on the demised premises at the time the distress is levied. If the property of any other person should be distrained, his remedy is at common law, and not under the statute which is cumulative. The plaintiff has declared under [368]*368the statute, but he has not alleged facts necessary to bring his case within the statute.

The demurrer is sustained.

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

Related

Anne Stulpin v. Patrick J. Bastian
New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 2024

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
100 A. 327, 29 Del. 366, 6 Boyce 366, 1917 Del. LEXIS 7, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bupp-v-veasey-delsuperct-1917.