Bupp v. Veasey

100 A. 327, 29 Del. 366, 6 Boyce 366, 1917 Del. LEXIS 7
Superior Court of Delaware·Decided March 28, 1917·No. No. 182·Published·Cited by 1 cases

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

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

100 A. 327 (Bupp v. Veasey) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

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