Wall v. Osborn
New York Supreme Court
Error from the superior court of the city of New-York. The Messrs. Wall sued Osborn in trespass for entering upon a lot owned by them, and taking down and carrying off a mill erected thereon. Osborn Was in possession of a lot adjoining that of the plaintiffs, whose mill projected a few inches upon the lot of the defendant.
Read the full summary
Error from the superior court of the city of New-York. The Messrs. Wall sued Osborn in trespass for entering upon a lot owned by them, and taking down and carrying off a mill erected thereon. Osborn Was in possession of a lot adjoining that of the plaintiffs, whose mill projected a few inches upon the lot of the defendant. The defendant sold the mill to one Carman, and told him that if he would send his men to take down the mill, at a specified time, he would have a man to assist him if he wanted help. The mill was subsequently taken down by Carman, but whether Osborn was present or furnished…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court,
Savage, Ch. J.
In Guille v. Swan, 19 Johns. R. 382, Ch. J. Spencer says: “ To render one man liable in trespass for the acts of others, it must appear either that they acted in concert, or that the act of the individual sought to be charged, ordinarily and naturally produced the acts of the *40others. In Scott v. Shepard, 2 Black. R. 892, Chief Justice De Grey laid it down as a correct principle, that one who does an unlawful act is considered as the doer of all that follows. 1 anguage of Lord Ellenborough, in Leame v. Bray, 3 East, 595, he is the causa causans — the prime mover of…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Morgan v. VarickNew York Supreme Court · 1832
3Cited by22 opinions
- Herring v. . HoppockNew York Court of Appeals · 1857
- Connah v. HaleNew York Supreme Court · 1840
- O'Malley v. Philadelphia Rapid Transit Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1915
- Burns v. HorkanSupreme Court of Georgia · 1906
- Smith v. HillNew York Supreme Court · 1856
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.