Legal Opinion
Bennett v. Brittingham
Superior Court of Delaware
Decided October 18, 1927No. Replevin, No. 8PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Harrington, J.,
charging the jury:
An action of replevin lies for the possession of goods and chattels unlawfully detained from the owner or person entitled to the possession thereof. The primary object of the action is the recovery of the property itself with damages for the taking and detention thereof. Secondarily and usually, however, as in this case, the object of the action is the recovery of a sum of money equivalent to the value of the property taken and detained with interest thereon. Frick v. Miller, 7 Boyce 369, 107 A. 391; Staunton v. Smith, 6 Penn. 193, 65 A. 593; Atlantic Refining…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Mathias v. SellersSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1878
- Frick v. MillerSuperior Court of Delaware · 1918
- Staunton v. SmithSuperior Court of Delaware · 1906
- Atlantic Refining Co. v. FeinbergSuperior Court of Delaware · 1920
3Cited by4 opinions
- In Re MarkelSupreme Court of Delaware · 1969
- Swiggett v. WatsonDistrict Court, D. Delaware · 1977
- Mills Novelty Co. v. TranseauSuperior Court of Delaware · 1937
- Universal Credit Co. v. SpinazzoloSuperior Court of Delaware · 1938