Darrach v. Jamison

Delaware Court of Common Pleas

Darrach v. Jamison

1 Del. Cas. 389

DecidedDecember 15, 1795

StatusPublished

This text of 1 Del. Cas. 389 (Darrach v. Jamison) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Delaware Court of Common Pleas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Darrach v. Jamison, 1 Del. Cas. 389 (Del. Super. Ct. 1795).

Pincite

Opinion

Chief Justice.

This point was determined in the late Supreme Court in the case of Attick’s Lessee v. Marsh, in which case the present Chief Justice [of the] Supreme Court and myself were counsel. There is no distinction between paroi and written evidence. The demurrer admits the evidence to be true. The party therefore has the full benefit of it; when the evidence is admitted to be true there can be nothing for the jury to decide. For when the evidence is admitted true, what it proves is a question of law. We consider that there is a right to demur, and an obligation to join in demurrer.

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

Chief Justice.

This point was determined in the late Supreme Court in the case of Attick’s Lessee v. Marsh, in which case the present Chief Justice [of the] Supreme Court and myself were counsel. There is no distinction between paroi and written evidence. The demurrer admits the evidence to be true. The party therefore has the full benefit of it; when the evidence is admitted to be true there can be nothing for the jury to decide. For when the evidence is admitted true, what it proves is a question of law. We consider that there is a right to demur, and an obligation to join in demurrer.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1 Del. Cas. 389, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/darrach-v-jamison-delctcompl-1795.