Hearn v. Hearn

1 Del. 498
CourtSuperior Court of Delaware
DecidedJuly 5, 1835
StatusPublished

This text of 1 Del. 498 (Hearn v. Hearn) 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
Hearn v. Hearn, 1 Del. 498 (Del. Ct. App. 1835).

Opinion

The Court

said the judge must have meant a bond with a collateral condition. His reasoning is otherwise against his own opinion; and that opinion clearly wrong if applied to a bond for the payment of money on demand. The distinction is between a collateral contract for a thing in fieri, and a precedent debt or duty. Where a *499 debt or duty is ascertained, no demand is necessary other than the bringing action which is a demand; but where the bond or contract is for a collateral thing a demand must be proved. Cro. Eliz. 548, 721; 1 Strange Rep. 88;2 Levinz 198; Cro. Jac. 242; 1 Saund. Rep. 32. n.

Layton, for plff. E. D. Cullen, for deft.

Judgment for plaintiff.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
1 Del. 498, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hearn-v-hearn-delsuperct-1835.