Legal Opinion
Williams v. Daisey
Superior Court of Delaware
Decided October 10, 1935No. 18PublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Harrington, J.,
delivering the opinion of the Court:
In the Dutchess of Kingston’s Case, 20 St. Tr. 361, it was held that the judgment of a court of concurrent jurisdiction directly upon the point was as a plea a bar or as evidence conclusive between the same parties upon the same matter directly in question in another court.
In Worknot v. Millen’s Adm’r, 1 Harr. 139, in stating the same general rule, this court said: “If a point has been once litigated or at issue between the parties and be settled by a verdict or admission of a party, in any subsequent proceeding between the same parties, this…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Southern Pacific Railroad v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1897
- Russell v. PlaceSupreme Court of the United States · 1877
- Reynolds v. StocktonSupreme Court of the United States · 1891
- Aurora City v. WestSupreme Court of the United States · 1869
- Coca Cola Co. v. Pepsi-Cola Co.Superior Court of Delaware · 1934
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Stephenson v. Capano Development, Inc.Supreme Court of Delaware · 1983
- Epstein v. Chatham Park, Inc.Superior Court of Delaware · 1959
- Venetsanos v. PappasCourt of Chancery of Delaware · 1936
- Hannigan v. Italo Petroleum Corp. of AmericaSuperior Court of Delaware · 1935
- Equity Corp. v. GrovesCourt of Chancery of Delaware · 1947
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.