Elliott v. Morgan

3 Del. 316
Superior Court of Delaware·Decided July 1, 1841·Published

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The justice can render no other judgment on the! report of referees than such as is warranted by the report. The in-j ference, therefore, on this entry would be, that the judgment was &cA [317]*317cording to the report; and this inference is confirmed by the marginal entry, which may be resorted to for this purpose. (Moore et al vs. Lunney, ante 28; and Booth vs. Jump, 2 Barr. Rep. 461.) Negro testimony is always received in the courts of our State, in cases between negroes or against a negro. It is not competent to this defendant to object to such testimony; nor does it appear conclusively from the record that the witness, Turner, was in fact examined.

Houston, for exceptant, defendant below. Wootten, for respondent.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Elliott v. Morgan, 3 Del. 316 (Del. Ct. App. 1841).

3 Del. 316 (Elliott v. Morgan) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.