Legal Opinion

Quill v. Carpenter

Superior Court of Delaware

Decided March 21, 1939No. 5PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Rodney, J.,

delivering the opinion of the Court:

In Levy v. Kirby, 9 W. W. Harr. (39 Del.) 109, 192 A. 696, and Levy v. Kirby, 22 Del. Ch. —, 196 A. 816, 817, the Superior Court and the Court of Chancery, respectively, considered the rights of one party to take deposition of an adverse party outside of the state, said deposition to be taken de bene esse. In both cases, on the facts there present, it was determined that such depositions could not be taken. In both cases the origin and history of the taking of testimony by deposition was dealt with and will not be here repeated. In Laurel…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Winter v. ElmoreSupreme Court of Alabama · 1889
  2. Western Union Teleg. Co. v. WilliamsCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1908
  3. Wheeler v. BurckhardtOregon Supreme Court · 1899
  4. Union Mortgage Co. v. RocheleauSupreme Court of Rhode Island · 1931
  5. Ex parte AlexanderMissouri Court of Appeals · 1912

10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. James Walter Truitt, a Minor, by Howard Truitt, His Next Friend, and Pearl L. Truitt, and Howard Truitt, Individually v. Russell Lowell GainesCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1963
  2. Denning v. E. I. duPont de Nemours & Co.Superior Court of Delaware · 1948
  3. James Walter Truitt, a Minor, by Howard Truitt, His Next Friend, and Pearl L. Truitt, and Howard Truitt, Individually v. Russell Lowell GainesCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1963

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API