Legal Opinion

Loft, Inc. v. Guth

Court of Chancery of Delaware

Decided February 24, 1937PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

The Chancellor:

In his book on the Law of Discovery, Sir James Wigram laid down two main propositions. The second of these is in part as follows:

“ * * * the right of a plaintiff in equity to the benefit of the defendant’s oath, is limited to a discovery of such material facts as relate to the plaintiff’s case — and does not extend to a discovery of the manner in which, or of the evidence by means of which, the defendant’s case is to be established, or to any discovery of the defendant’s evidence.” Wigram on Law of Discovery, star page 90.

This principle is as applicable today in courts of…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Wise v. Western Union Telegraph Co.Superior Court of Delaware · 1935
  2. Terry v. StullCourt of Chancery of Delaware · 1933
  3. Mackenzie Oil Co. v. Omar Oil & Gas Co.Court of Chancery of Delaware · 1922
  4. Sunset Telephone & Telegraph Co. v. City of EurekaU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Northern California · 1903

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Loft, Inc. v. GuthCourt of Chancery of Delaware · 1938
  2. Hardenbergh v. BothSupreme Court of Iowa · 1955
  3. Mayer v. AdamsCourt of Chancery of Delaware · 1961
  4. Loft v. GuthCourt of Chancery of Delaware · 1938
  5. Mayer v. AdamsCourt of Chancery of Delaware · 1961

2 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