Case Name: HIGGINS' lessee vs. ROE and PHILLIPS, tenant in possession
Court: Delaware Superior Court
Jurisdiction: Delaware
Decision Date: 1839
Citations: 3 Harr. 49
Docket Number: 
Parties: HIGGINS’ lessee vs. ROE and PHILLIPS, tenant in possession.
Judges: 
Reporter: Delaware Reports
Volume: 3
Pages: 49–49

Head Matter:
HIGGINS’ lessee vs. ROE and PHILLIPS, tenant in possession.
In ejectment the wiit of estrepement to stay waste is not a writ of course; but will be granted on motion, supported by affidavit.
Ejectment.
J. A. Bayard, for plaintiff.
Hamilton, for defendant.

Opinion:
After a continuance of the cause at the trial term, Mr. Bayard moved for a writ of estrepement; and the question arose whether he was entitled to the writ' as of course, without affidavit. He cited 3 Blac. Corn., ch. 14, sec. 2, waste, to show that it was a common law writ; but the Chief Justice suggested that the writ was given by the statute of Gloucester, and applied only to real actions and actions of waste, and not in possessory actions suchas ejectment. The act of assembly (Dig. 167,) gives authority to award the writin ejectment; thus extending the remedy: and it is but reasonable that the party applying for it should file an affidavit showing the apprehension that waste will be done.
An affidavit was then filed, and the writ was ordered.