Legal Opinion
State v. Bradford
Superior Court of Delaware
Decided January 3, 1936No. Execution, No. 82PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Rodney, J.,
delivering the opinion of the Court:
It has frequently been held in this State that statutory repeals by implication are not favored. A former act will not, by implication, be held to have been repealed by a later act unless the two cannot have a concurrent operation or unless the latter so covers the subject matter of the former as to afford conclusive evidence of an intent to supercede it. State v. Peverly, 2 W. W. Harr. (32 Del.) 443, 125 A. 421; State v. Donovan, 5 Boyce (28 Del.) 40, 90 A. 220; State v. Fahey, 2 W. W. Harr. (32 Del.) 504, 126 A. 730; State v. Foote, 5 W. W.…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- State Ex Rel. Malott v. Board of County CommissionersMontana Supreme Court · 1930
- Chesapeake & Potomac Telephone Co. v. ManningSupreme Court of the United States · 1902
- State v. DonovanNew York Court of General Session of the Peace · 1914
- People v. . BromwichNew York Court of Appeals · 1911
- People ex rel. Coffman v. Illinois Central RailroadIllinois Supreme Court · 1924
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Philadelphia, Baltimore & Washington Railroad v. Mayor & Council of WilmingtonCourt of Chancery of Delaware · 1948
- Provident Trust Co. v. BanksCourt of Chancery of Delaware · 1939
- Woods v. SpoturnoSuperior Court of Delaware · 1936
- Town of Seaford v. Eastern Shore Public Service Co.Superior Court of Delaware · 1942
- Bank of Delaware v. Wilmington Housing AuthoritySuperior Court of Delaware · 1976