Case v. De Goes
New York Supreme Court
TRESPASS for cutting down and carrying away a quantity of saw-logs, after notice of title, and being forbidden. The defendants justified under a licence from one Abraham Bull, who at the time of the trespass, was in possession, by virtue of a writ of restitution, awarded upon an indictment against the now plaintiff, for a forcible entry and detainer, which was afterwards quashed for irregularity, and re-restitution directed.
Read the full summary
TRESPASS for cutting down and carrying away a quantity of saw-logs, after notice of title, and being forbidden. The defendants justified under a licence from one Abraham Bull, who at the time of the trespass, was in possession, by virtue of a writ of restitution, awarded upon an indictment against the now plaintiff, for a forcible entry and detainer, which was afterwards quashed for irregularity, and re-restitution directed. A verdict having been found in favor of the plaintiff, a motion was now made to set it aside, on the following grounds. 1st. That as he was not in actual possession when…
1Opinion of the Court
Per curiam, delivered by
Thompson, J.
It has been submitted to the court to determine, whether an action of trespass can be sustained against the present defendants.' I am satisfied, from an examination of the authorities, that it cannot. Bull was put into possession by the judgment and proceedings of a court having jurisdiction of the subject matter. These proceedings, however, having been set aside for irregularity, Bull may be considered a trespasser by i-elation, and he made answerable for the *263damages. But it is a general rule with respect to the doctrine of relation, that it shall not do…
2Cited by10 opinions
- Hibberd v. SmithCalifornia Supreme Court · 1885
- Goodsell v. StinsonIndiana Supreme Court · 1845
- Bacon v. KimmelMichigan Supreme Court · 1866
- Sanderson v. PriceSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1846
- Judd v. . SeekinsNew York Court of Appeals · 1875
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.