Legal Opinion

Holmead v. Corcoran

U.S. Circuit Court for the District of District of Columbia

Decided June 15, 1816PublishedCited by 1 opinion

Trespass, quare clausum fregit. Defence on warrant. THE COURT (THRUSTON, Circuit Judge, absent, and MORSELL, Circuit Judge, sitting pro forma, by consent of the parties, he having been of counsel in the cause) decided that the plaintiff should not give evidence of trespasses at a place not located on the plats, nor outside of the lines of "Pleasant Plains” as located by the plaintiff on the plats; although the plaintiff, by his title, had a right to locate “Pleasant Plains,”…

Read the full summary

Trespass, quare clausum fregit. Defence on warrant. THE COURT (THRUSTON, Circuit Judge, absent, and MORSELL, Circuit Judge, sitting pro forma, by consent of the parties, he having been of counsel in the cause) decided that the plaintiff should not give evidence of trespasses at a place not located on the plats, nor outside of the lines of "Pleasant Plains” as located by the plaintiff on the plats; although the plaintiff, by his title, had a right to locate “Pleasant Plains,” so as to include the place where, &e., being of opinion that the plaintiff, in this suit, is bound by his location, and…

1Opinion of the Court

THE COURT (MORSELL, Circuit Judge, not sitting)

was of opinion that such evidence ought not to be received, and overruled the motion for a new trial. See Peake (Am. Ed.) 1ST. and Seld. Prae.

2Cited by1 opinion

  1. Ruckle v. American Car & Foundry Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Middle Pennsylvania · 1912

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API