Legal Opinion

Cerchio v. Mullins

Superior Court of Delaware

Decided November 17, 1922No. Capias Ad. Resp., Nos. 135 and 136PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Rodney, J.,

delivering the opinion of the court:

The first question to be determined is the propriety of the admission of the testimony of the witness, Pippin, relative to the declarations of the son on the way to the hospital shortly after the accident to the effect that he, the son, at the time of the accident was on his way to Marshallton for papers for his father,' the defendant. No objection was made to this testimony when offered. However, such testimony alone is not competent for the purpose of proving the agency of the son for the father. Agency cannot be proved by the declarations or…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Oldham v. CooperCourt of Chancery of Delaware · 1877
  2. Taylor v. MasonSupreme Court of Kansas · 1882
  3. Lamanna v. StevensSuperior Court of Delaware · 1915
  4. Childress v. Smith-Echols-Burnett Hdw. Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1909

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. McHugh v. BrownSupreme Court of Delaware · 1956
  2. Chrysler Corp. v. QuimbySupreme Court of Delaware · 1958
  3. Seward v. NissenDistrict Court, D. Delaware · 1942
  4. Smith v. CallahanSupreme Court of Delaware · 1928
  5. Chrysler Corporation v. QuimbySupreme Court of Delaware · 1958

8 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