Superior Court of Delaware, 1839

Higgins' Lessee v. Roe Phillips

Higgins' Lessee v. Roe Phillips
Superior Court of Delaware · Decided July 5, 1839
3 Del. 49

Counsel

J. A. Bayard, for plaintiff. Hamilton, for defendant.

Higgins' Lessee v. Roe Phillips

Opinion of the Court

After a continuance of the cause at the trial term, Mr. Bayard moved for a writ of estrepement; and the question arose whether he was entitled to the writ' as of course, without affidavit. He cited 3 Blac. Corn., ch. 14, sec. 2, waste, to show that it was a common law writ; but the Chief Justice suggested that the writ was given by the statute of Gloucester, and applied only to real actions and actions of waste, and not in possessory actions suchas ejectment. The act of assembly (Dig. 167,) gives authority to award the writin ejectment; thus extending the remedy: and it is but reasonable that the party applying for it should file an affidavit showing the apprehension that waste will be done.

An affidavit was then filed, and the writ was ordered.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.