Coughenour v. Charles E. Stewart & Co.
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 168, April T., 1910, by defendants, from judgment of .C. P. Somerset Co., Sept. T., 1907, No. 338, on verdict for plaintiff in case of.C. S. Coughenour v. Charles E. Stewart & Company. Trespass quare clausum fregit.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 168, April T., 1910, by defendants, from judgment of .C. P. Somerset Co., Sept. T., 1907, No. 338, on verdict for plaintiff in case of.C. S. Coughenour v. Charles E. Stewart & Company. Trespass quare clausum fregit. At the trial the plaintiff made the following offer: Mr. Scott: We propose to prove by the witness on the stand that the dwelling house, stable and other outbuildings were in a good, tenantable condition when the defendants took possession of the same; that the fences were good; the bars and gates and the inclosure around a certain garden on the leased premises were in…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Morrison, J.,
This is an action of trespass and the plaintiff filed a declaration charging that the defendants did with force and arms break and enter the close of the plaintiff, describing it, containing 240 acres of land. The declaration contains five counts or specifications of damages alleged to have been caused by the defendants upon said land and each and all of said counts or specifications allege trespass quare clausum fregit and the declaration contains no hint of any other cause of action, nor is there any inconsistency apparent on the face thereof. The defendants *13pleaded “…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Little Schuylkill Navigation, Railroad & Coal Co. v. Richards's AdministratorSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1868
- Erie City Iron Works v. BarberSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1888
- Noble's Administrator v. LaleySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1865
- Welker v. MetcalfSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1904
- Pennsylvania Railroad v. ZugSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1864
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.