Legal Opinion

Connally v. McConnell

Superior Court of Delaware

Decided December 8, 1897PublishedCited by 1 opinion

Action of assumpsit (No. 2 to Nov. T. 1897); narr; common counts with a bill of particulars. The usual pleas were filed.

1Opinion of the Court

Spruancb, J.,

charging the jury:

Gentlemen of the jury:—This case comes into this Court upon an appeal from a judgment of a Justice of the Peace, and it is tried here as if the action had originally been brought in this Court.

The only part of the plaintiff’s declaration applicable to this transaction is a count for goods sold and delivered, which is limited by the bill of particulars to the goods therein mentioned, viz: One bicycle and two other articles for which $56.40 with interest is claimed.

There is considerable conflict of testimony, but the determination of questions of fact belongs…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Locke v. LewisMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1878
  2. Eclipse Wind Mill Co. v. ThorsonSupreme Court of Iowa · 1877

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. McClemy v. BrownSuperior Court of Delaware · 1916

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

Powered by the Exa API