Spruance v. Myerdirck

43 A. 479, 18 Del. 205, 2 Penne. 205, 1899 Del. LEXIS 30
CourtSuperior Court of Delaware
DecidedMay 10, 1899
DocketAction of Assumpsit No. 37
StatusPublished

This text of 43 A. 479 (Spruance v. Myerdirck) 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
Spruance v. Myerdirck, 43 A. 479, 18 Del. 205, 2 Penne. 205, 1899 Del. LEXIS 30 (Del. Ct. App. 1899).

Opinion

Lore, C. J.:

The bill of particulars is not sufficient, for the reason that none of the items set out therein are admissible under either of the counts of the declaration; that is, for money had and received, or on an account stated. We therefore order that a further bill of particulars be filed.

The plaintiff,, upon his application, is granted leave to amend.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
43 A. 479, 18 Del. 205, 2 Penne. 205, 1899 Del. LEXIS 30, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/spruance-v-myerdirck-delsuperct-1899.