Legal Opinion

Spain v. Rossiter

Supreme Court of Delaware

Decided February 16, 1923No. 101PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

Rodney, J.,

delivering the opinion of the court:

Miss Rossiter's testimony was introduced to show that she knew that the contract with Spain was for 12 months instead of one month because it was her invariable custom to write such contracts for 12 months; that she had never written similar contracts for less than 12 months and had no power so to do. In my opinion this was material and relevant where the sole issue was as to whether a contract reading for 12 months was fraudulent, it being claimed to have been intended for a one month contract. Being material and relevant cross-examination and…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Held v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1919
  2. State v. PuccaNew York Court of General Session of the Peace · 1902
  3. State v. HamiltonNew York Court of General Session of the Peace · 1907

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. State v. StillNew York Court of General Session of the Peace · 1926

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

Powered by the Exa API