Cann v. Thompson

Superior Court of Delaware

Cann v. Thompson

5 Del. 398

Superior Court of Delaware·Decided July 5, 1852·Published

Opinion

The Court

ruled out the plots. A party having been regularly notified of the time and place of laying down pretensions, is bound by the proceedings not only on that day, but on every subsequent *399 day to which the matter is adjourned. But a meeting on a different day is irregular, without special notice to the other party.

Platt, for plaintiff. Bates, for defendant.

The plaintiff afterwards had a verdict.

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

The Court

ruled out the plots. A party having been regularly notified of the time and place of laying down pretensions, is bound by the proceedings not only on that day, but on every subsequent *399 day to which the matter is adjourned. But a meeting on a different day is irregular, without special notice to the other party.

Platt, for plaintiff. Bates, for defendant.

The plaintiff afterwards had a verdict.

Cann v. Thompson, 5 Del. 398 (Del. Ct. App. 1852).

Pincite

5 Del. 398 (Cann v. Thompson) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.