Higgins' Lessee v. Roe Phillips
This text of 3 Del. 49 (Higgins' Lessee v. Roe Phillips) 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.
Opinion
After a continuance of the cause at the trial term, Mr. Bayard moved for a writ of estrepement; and the question arose whether he was entitled to the writ' as of course, without affidavit. He cited 3 Blac. Corn., ch. 14, sec. 2, waste, to show that it was a common law writ; but the Chief Justice suggested that the writ was given by the statute of Gloucester, and applied only to real actions and actions of waste, and not in possessory actions suchas ejectment. The act of assembly (Dig. 167,) gives authority to award the writin ejectment; thus extending the remedy: and it is but reasonable that the party applying for it should file an affidavit showing the apprehension that waste will be done.
An affidavit was then filed, and the writ was ordered.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
3 Del. 49, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/higgins-lessee-v-roe-phillips-delsuperct-1839.