Case Name: GRIER v. BROOK'S ADMINISTRATORS
Court: Delaware Court of Common Pleas
Jurisdiction: Delaware
Decision Date: 1797-12
Citations: 1 Del. Cas. 501
Docket Number: 
Parties: GRIER v. BROOK’S ADMINISTRATORS.
Judges: 
Reporter: Delaware Cases
Volume: 1
Pages: 501–502

Head Matter:
GRIER v. BROOK’S ADMINISTRATORS.
Court of Common Pleas. Kent.
December, 1797.
Clayton’s Notebook, 23.
Ridgely
moved the Court to nonsuit plaintiff for want of a probate to the letter, which he said was the cause of action, and cited 1 Del.Laws 421.
Miller and Rodney, contra.
The words “other writing” in the Act cannot embrace this letter, which we do not produce like a bond or note as the cause of action, but as the evidence of a cause. They cited Wallen and Wife v. Evans and Wife in Sussex, on a motion to nonsuit plaintiffs because the probate was made after the commencement of the action. The Court overruled it. They cited as analogous (query) Doug. 93, Peake 99.

Opinion:
Bassett, C. J.
The letter is the cause of action. The plaintiff goes for the sum mentioned in it, viz £100, and waives the rest of his claim. See Esp.N.P. 143. The probate should have been produced, because we have no other evidence of a cause of action.
Rodney, J., concurred. Johns, J., gave no opinion, having been of counsel in the case.
Enter nonsuit.
The plaintiff's counsel prayed a bill of exceptions which was signed by the Court.