Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

2 Del. 159

Waples v. Waples

Superior Court of Delaware

Decided July 5, 1837

Superior Court of Delaware · decided 1837-07-05

Summons in waste. moved for a view and for a continuance of the cause to give time. objected. The motion for a view is not a motion of course, but in the discretion of the court. The practice in England is under the statute of Ann, which has not been held to extend to this state. 2 Tidd 846. Our own act of assembly (Digest 117,) does not affect the granting of a view, but only regulates the mode of conducting it when granted. So of the rule of court.

Decided 1837-07-05

Per curiam.

¶1 The action of waste is rarely brought in this state, having been nearly superceded by the action of ejectment. But the action may yet be brought. The view could not be asked for in this action until issue joined; this is, therefore, the first term when such a motion could have been made. Without deciding that a view is incident to the action of waste, we can say that it would often be proper, and frequently necessary, for the jury to see the place wasted, as it is attended with the highly penal consequence of a forfeiture of the place wasted.

¶2 The Court, therefore, order a view, and continue the cause for that purpose; and we direct that the first twelve jurors on the panel re~ turned to the next term, shall be the viewers, six of whom shall sit *160 on the trial, allowing each of the parties to challenge three at the trial if he choose.

Ridgely, for plaintiff. Cullen, for defendant.
/2/del/159 · .json · Public domain