Robinson v. Ingram

Delaware Court of Common Pleas

Robinson v. Ingram

1 Del. Cas. 223, 1799 Del. LEXIS 12

DecidedApril 30, 1799

StatusPublished

This text of 1 Del. Cas. 223 (Robinson v. Ingram) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Delaware Court of Common Pleas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Robinson v. Ingram, 1 Del. Cas. 223, 1799 Del. LEXIS 12 (Del. Super. Ct. 1799).

Pincite

Opinion

Booth, C. J.

The Court do not discover anything in the warrant directing surveyor’s attendance, but we think hereafter the surveyor should be summoned, or a direction in the warrant to lay down pretensions and also to attend, etc. As the practice has not been in all cases hitherto to summon, plaintiff is not censurable, and the cause must be continued.

Note. Some attorneys were in the habit of issuing subpoenas, and others not, for the surveyors. And the surveyors, though frequently refusing to attend unless subpoenaed, have nevertheless often claimed surveyors’ wages for their daily attendance.

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

Booth, C. J.

The Court do not discover anything in the warrant directing surveyor’s attendance, but we think hereafter the surveyor should be summoned, or a direction in the warrant to lay down pretensions and also to attend, etc. As the practice has not been in all cases hitherto to summon, plaintiff is not censurable, and the cause must be continued.

Note. Some attorneys were in the habit of issuing subpoenas, and others not, for the surveyors. And the surveyors, though frequently refusing to attend unless subpoenaed, have nevertheless often claimed surveyors’ wages for their daily attendance.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1 Del. Cas. 223, 1799 Del. LEXIS 12, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/robinson-v-ingram-delctcompl-1799.