Legal Opinion

Hannigan v. Italo Petroleum Corp. of America

Superior Court of Delaware

Decided September 19, 1935No. 105PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Harrington, J.,

delivering the opinion of the Court:

The fifth plea, as amended, is based on the existence of an alleged champertous bargain between the beneficial owners of the notes sued on and one L. J. Byers, whereby they assigned all of their interests in such notes *183to Byers. It appears, however, that Byers was a mere volunteer, and had no previous interest in those notes.

It is, also, alleged that, in consideration of such assignment, Byers agreed to bring suit on the notes in question, to pay the expenses of that suit, and if he procured judgment in that action to pay a certain portion of…

2Cases cited20 opinions

  1. Johannessen v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1912
  2. Coca Cola Co. v. Pepsi-Cola Co.Superior Court of Delaware · 1934
  3. Geisendorff v. CobbsIndiana Court of Appeals · 1911
  4. Kealoha v. CastleSupreme Court of the United States · 1908
  5. Gibson v. GillespieSuperior Court of Delaware · 1928

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

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Cede & Co. v. Technicolor, Inc.Supreme Court of Delaware · 1988
  2. Italo-Petroleum Corporation of America v. HanniganSupreme Court of Delaware · 1940
  3. Rice v. FarrellSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1942
  4. Stoltz Realty Co. v. RaphaelSupreme Court of Delaware · 1983
  5. Hank Thorp, Inc. v. Minilite, Inc.District Court, D. Delaware · 1979

5 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