Legal Opinion
Colvocoresses v. W. S. Wasserman Co.
Superior Court of Delaware
Decided January 10, 1938No. Action of Assumpsit on a Contract, No. 122PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Harrington, J.,
delivering the opinion of the court:
The defendant has demurred to the first and second counts of the plaintiff’s amended declaration. It is not necessary for us to give any further consideration to the first count because the plaintiff concedes that a count containing precisely the same allegations was before this court on demurrer in the unreported case of Colvocoresses v. Wasserman Co. decided February 29th, 1936, and was then held to be so defective in substance that the plaintiff could not base a cause of action on it. This was because the plain*74tiff’s rights necessarily…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Barnard v. KelloggSupreme Court of the United States · 1871
- Eustis Mining Co. v. Beer, Sondheimer & Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1917
- Colvocoresses v. W. S. Wasserman Co.Superior Court of Delaware · 1937
- Crockett v. GreenCourt of Chancery of Delaware · 1870
- Penn Steel Casting & Machine Co. v. Wilmington Malleable Iron Co.Superior Court of Delaware · 1898
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Colvocoresses v. W. S. Wasserman Co.Court of Chancery of Delaware · 1942
- Wilmington Trust Co. v. Wilmington Trust Co.Court of Chancery of Delaware · 1940
- Stabler v. RamsayCourt of Chancery of Delaware · 1948
- Maloney v. JohnsonCourt of Chancery of Delaware · 1939
- duPont v. Wilmington Trust Co.Court of Chancery of Delaware · 1946
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.