Bulkley v. Dolbeare
Supreme Court of Connecticut
This was an action of trespass, in two counts. The first was trespass quare clausum fregit, alleging the cutting and carrying away of a certain number of trees; the second was trespass de bonis asportatis, alleging the taking and carrying away of the timber and trees, being in the plaintiffs’ possession, on the land described in the first count.
Read the full summary
This was an action of trespass, in two counts. The first was trespass quare clausum fregit, alleging the cutting and carrying away of a certain number of trees; the second was trespass de bonis asportatis, alleging the taking and carrying away of the timber and trees, being in the plaintiffs’ possession, on the land described in the first count. The cause was tried at New-London, October term, 1827, b efore Brainard, J. The defendant claimed title to the locus in quo, first, by grant, and secondly, by more than fifteen years adverse possession. He further claimed, that at the time of the…
1Opinion of the Court
Hosmer, Ch. J.
I put out of consideration the objection, that trover is sustainable in the proposed case, as not bearing on the point of controversy. It is no legal consequence, because one species of action may be maintained, that therefore a different action cannot be supported. It frequently happens, that trespass, trover and assumpsit for money had and received may, either of them, be maintained, on the same facts, at the election of the party bringing the suit.
The case involved in the judge’s charge, on which the jury were informed an action of trespass might be -maintained, was merely…
2Cited by17 opinions
- Peyton v. DesmondCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1904
- University of Vermont & State Agricultural College v. WardSupreme Court of Vermont · 1932
- McGonigle v. AtchisonSupreme Court of Kansas · 1885
- State v. RhodesSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2020
- Morey v. HoytSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1895
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.