Hammer v. Pierce

Superior Court of Delaware

Hammer v. Pierce

5 Del. 304

DecidedJuly 5, 1850

StatusPublished

This text of 5 Del. 304 (Hammer v. Pierce) 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

Hammer v. Pierce, 5 Del. 304 (Del. Ct. App. 1850).

Pincite

Opinion

The Court

refused the nonsuit, on the ground that the action of trespass assault and battery is a transitory action, and the venue, need not be proved.

The defence offered to prove the declarations of the plaintiff’s father. Objected to. '

Mr. Bayard.—George Hammer is merely a nominal party, as the next friend of the plaintiff.

Mr. Rogers.—He is entitled to the fruits of the verdict.

Mr. Bayard.—Damages for an injury to the child are as mtich his as a legacy left him.

The evidence was ruled out.

Verdict for plaintiff $203 00.

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