Legal Opinion

Costello v. Cording

Superior Court of Delaware

Decided September 18, 1952No. 355PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Layton, J.:

I am not impressed by plaintiff’s objections. Where, as under the practice of this jurisdiction, a complaint affords little more than general notice of the claim asserted, defendant, under our discovery rules, is naturally entitled to a full disclosure of all material facts upon which the claim is founded. Pfeifer v. Johnson Motor Lines, 8 Terry 191, 89 A. 2d 154, 155. And I cannot conceive of a better form of propounding the interrogatories than here devised. Concededly, there are cases which have rejected interrogatories filed in the form here filed. Ritepoint Co. v. Secretary…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Pfeifer v. Johnson Motor Lines, Inc.Superior Court of Delaware · 1952
  2. Ritepoint Co. v. Secretary Pen Co., Inc.District Court, D. New Jersey · 1950

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Breen v. PhelpsSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1982
  2. Klein v. Sunbeam Corp.Superior Court of Delaware · 1952
  3. Tobacco & Allied Stocks, Inc. v. Transamerica Corp.District Court, D. Delaware · 1954
  4. Smith v. Danvir CorporationSuperior Court of Delaware · 1963
  5. Wiener v. MarkelSuperior Court of Delaware · 1952

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

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

Powered by the Exa API