This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

D leased property from D. At the end of the lease, P, through its attorney, sent a letter containing an itemized list of damages. P sought payment for repairs. D wrote back, through its attorney, accepting responsibility for some of the damages but not for all of them. P filed a complaint for confession of judgment against D pursuant to a warrant of attorney contained in a real estate and equipment lease. The basis was D's alleged failure to make repairs to the leased premises and equipment as required in the lease agreement. A judgment was entered for $ 41,738.94, however, that judgment was opened. A jury returned a verdict in favor of Din the amount of $ 47,300.00. The trial court denied D's motion for a new trial. A panel of the Superior Court reversed and granted D a new trial on the ground that the trial court erred in admitting certain correspondence between the parties' attorneys. P appealed.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.