Rogers v. Randel

Superior Court of Delaware

Rogers v. Randel

2 Del. 499

DecidedJuly 5, 1839

StatusPublished

This text of 2 Del. 499 (Rogers v. Randel) 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

Rogers v. Randel, 2 Del. 499 (Del. Ct. App. 1839).

Pincite

Opinion

Assumpsit lies for an attorney’s fee.

In this case the plaintiff recovered two thousand one hundred and eighty four dollars, for services rendered as attorney and counsel for the defendant in the cases of Randel vs. Wright; Randel vs. The Chesapeake and Delaware Canal Company, and other cases growing out of them.

The declaration was on a special contract, with a quantum meruit count; on which last the recovery was had, the plaintiff having failed to prove the special contract.

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

Assumpsit lies for an attorney’s fee.

In this case the plaintiff recovered two thousand one hundred and eighty four dollars, for services rendered as attorney and counsel for the defendant in the cases of Randel vs. Wright; Randel vs. The Chesapeake and Delaware Canal Company, and other cases growing out of them.

The declaration was on a special contract, with a quantum meruit count; on which last the recovery was had, the plaintiff having failed to prove the special contract.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

2 Del. 499, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rogers-v-randel-delsuperct-1839.