Wingate v. Nelson

Delaware Court of Common Pleas

Wingate v. Nelson

2 Del. Cas. 98

DecidedApril 15, 1798

StatusPublished

This text of 2 Del. Cas. 98 (Wingate v. Nelson) 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

Wingate v. Nelson, 2 Del. Cas. 98 (Del. Super. Ct. 1798).

Pincite

Opinion

Chief Justice.

Difference in opinion of counsel. Defendant pleads non culpa and liberum tenementum. If he cut or carried away the trees, and they were not on his freehold, you will find him guilty. Boundaries when proved are more certain than course and distance. When binding words in a grant or patent, as “by and with” or “down the branch,” it will go by the run, not the cripple of the branch.

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

Chief Justice.

Difference in opinion of counsel. Defendant pleads non culpa and liberum tenementum. If he cut or carried away the trees, and they were not on his freehold, you will find him guilty. Boundaries when proved are more certain than course and distance. When binding words in a grant or patent, as “by and with” or “down the branch,” it will go by the run, not the cripple of the branch.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

2 Del. Cas. 98, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wingate-v-nelson-delctcompl-1798.