MacKlin v. Ruth
This text of 4 Del. 87 (MacKlin v. Ruth) 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
thought there was no analogy between this case and the one cited of an action on a promissory note, which is of itself evidence of the debt, and therefore, its production necessary. But this is an action on a bond with a collateral condition; which, if produced, would have no effect in proving or disproving the matter now to be tried, which is the amount of damages occasioned by breach of the condition of the bond. This breach must be proved independently of the bond; the existence of which is admitted by the judgment by default, which admits a cause of action; to what amount must be the subject of proof.
The jury made and returned an inquisition in the case, assessing the damages and costs at $529 61.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
4 Del. 87, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/macklin-v-ruth-delsuperct-1843.