Crow v. Cann
43 A. 839, 18 Del. 208, 2 Penne. 208, 1899 Del. LEXIS 31
CourtSuperior Court of Delaware
DecidedJune 9, 1899
DocketCertiorari No. 36
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases
This text of 43 A. 839 (Crow v. Cann) 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
Crow v. Cann, 43 A. 839, 18 Del. 208, 2 Penne. 208, 1899 Del. LEXIS 31 (Del. Ct. App. 1899).
Opinion
The exceptions are fatal. The statute (Rev. Code, Chap. 101, See. 6, p. 770) is mandatory, and prescribes in terms what the judgment shall be; that is, that the plaintiff shall have judgment for the possession of the premises, and for his costs. The verdict is in direct violation of the provisions of that statute.
The judgment below is reversed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Giandonancio v. O'Donnell
103 A. 353 (Superior Court of Delaware, 1918)
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bluebook (online)
43 A. 839, 18 Del. 208, 2 Penne. 208, 1899 Del. LEXIS 31, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/crow-v-cann-delsuperct-1899.