State v. Bay State Gas Co.

57 A. 291, 20 Del. 214, 4 Penne. 214, 1901 Del. LEXIS 56
Superior Court of Delaware·Decided November 19, 1901·No. No. 219·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinion

Decision.

Lore, C. J.,

-—We consider the return in this case insufficient,

and order the peremptory writ, notwithstanding the return.

(Exception noted for respondents.)

The decree of the Court, as drawn out, was (omitting the caption) in the following words and figures, to wit:

And now, to wit, this 19th day of November, A. D. 1901, it appearing to the Court here that the return of the respondents to the Alternative Writ of Mandamus, filed in this cause is insufficient in law, it is considered, ordered and adjudged by the Court, that notwithstanding the return of the respondents to the said alternative writ, the Peremptory Writ of Mandamus of the State of Delaware issue, commanding the said respondents as prayed for [238] in the petition filed in this cause and that the said respondents make return to the Court here to said peremptory writ on Saturday, the thirtieth day of November, A. D. 1901, at 10 o’clock A. M.
“ Chas. B. Lore, C. J.”

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

State v. Bay State Gas Co., 57 A. 291, 20 Del. 214, 4 Penne. 214, 1901 Del. LEXIS 56 (Del. Ct. App. 1901).

57 A. 291 (State v. Bay State Gas Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Santow v. Ullman
166 A.2d 135 (Court of Chancery of Delaware, 1960)
Santow v. Ullman
166 A.2d 135 (Supreme Court of Delaware, 1960)
MacCrone v. American Capital Corporation
51 F. Supp. 462 (D. Delaware, 1943)
Simkin v. Cole
122 A. 191 (Superior Court of Delaware, 1922)
Jones v. Hinderer
108 A. 737 (Superior Court of Delaware, 1920)