30 Del. 284 | Del. Super. Ct. | 1919
delivering the opinion:
The defendant demurs generally to the first and second counts of plaintiff’s declaration, contending that no sufficient averment is made by plaintiff that she was in possession of the premises laid as the locus in quo of the trespass.
In the second count, the averment is the defendant broke and entered “a certain close of the said plaintiff,” and then and there
The averments are, in the judgment of the court, sufficient to support proof of the possession of the premises by the plaintiff at the time of the alleged trespass.
Demurrer overruled.