Sirman Use of Tunnel v. Barnard's Adm'rx.

Superior Court of Delaware

Sirman Use of Tunnel v. Barnard's Adm'rx.

1 Del. 497

Superior Court of Delaware·Decided July 5, 1835·Published

Opinion

Rule to show cause why an award should not be set aside on the ground that no notice of the meeting of the arbitrators was given to the defendant. The reference specified that the rule might be executed exporte on ten days notice. It was admitted that notice had not been served on the deft, but on her counsel. Mrs. Bernard resides in the county.

Rule absolute, (a)

(a)

See Cazier vs. Blackstock, ante 362.

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

Rule to show cause why an award should not be set aside on the ground that no notice of the meeting of the arbitrators was given to the defendant. The reference specified that the rule might be executed exporte on ten days notice. It was admitted that notice had not been served on the deft, but on her counsel. Mrs. Bernard resides in the county.

Rule absolute, (a)

(a)

See Cazier vs. Blackstock, ante 362.

Sirman Use of Tunnel v. Barnard's Adm'rx., 1 Del. 497 (Del. Ct. App. 1835).

Pincite

1 Del. 497 (Sirman Use of Tunnel v. Barnard's Adm'rx.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.