Fisher v. Morris
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
DEMURRER. This was an action of trespass quare clausum fregit, &c. brought in this Court to December Term, 1838, by James C. Fisher against Samuel B. Morris. The plaintiff declared for a trespass to his close, situate in the township of Moyamensing and county of Philadelphia; particularly describing it by courses and distances, metes and bounds, &c. The defendant pleaded not guilty, and liberum tenementum.
Read the full summary
DEMURRER. This was an action of trespass quare clausum fregit, &c. brought in this Court to December Term, 1838, by James C. Fisher against Samuel B. Morris. The plaintiff declared for a trespass to his close, situate in the township of Moyamensing and county of Philadelphia; particularly describing it by courses and distances, metes and bounds, &c. The defendant pleaded not guilty, and liberum tenementum. The plaintiff joined issue on the first plea, and demurred specially to the second — assigning for causes of demurrer that the plea « amounts to the general issue, and tends to great and…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Sergeant, J.
The action of trespass quare clausum fregit, is founded on possession. To sustain it, the plaintiff must show that he was in the possession in fact of the premises at the time the injuries complained of were committed. The possession is a sufficient prima facie title for the plaintiff. His declaration technically states it to be his close, without more — not saying whether it is his by title, or that he was seised in fee simple, or for life, or possessed of an estate for years, or vestures terree, or other estate. In law, he who has the…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- M'Bride v. DuncanSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1836
3Cited by2 opinions
- Humes v. KramerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1926
- Chestnut Hill & Spring House Turnpike Co. v. PiperSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1875