Merwin v. Camp
Supreme Court of Connecticut
THIS was an action of trespass quart clausum fregit, brought by the plaintiffs, as agents of the first society of Durham ; and tried in Middlesex county, December term, 1818, before Trum-hull, Hosmer and Peters, Js.
Read the full summary
THIS was an action of trespass quart clausum fregit, brought by the plaintiffs, as agents of the first society of Durham ; and tried in Middlesex county, December term, 1818, before Trum-hull, Hosmer and Peters, Js. Qn {|le trial, the defendants admitted the acts complained of; but rested their defénce on the following grounds: 1. That at the time those acts were done, one Samuel C. Camp was in possession under the plaintiffs as their tenant ; and that the plaintiffs, therefore, could not sustain the action. 2. That the defendants owned the locus in quo, as heirs of one Hezekiah Talcott,…
1Opinion of the Court
Hosmer, Ch. J.
This is an action of trespass, brought by the first society of Durham, against the defendants, for entering on a lot of land, and doing damage. At the time of the entry, the plaintiffs claimed to be in the actual possession. The jury were directed, “ if the society were in possession, that the burden of proof devolved on the defendants, to show a better title.” The legal propriety of the charge, thus far, does not admit of a question. Trespass is an action founded on possession merely ; and it is not necessary that the title should come into view. Any possession constitutes a…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Byrne v. Van HoesenNew York Supreme Court · 1809
- Hoskins v. HulingCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1884
- Jackson ex dem. Bleecker v. WhitfordNew York Supreme Court · 1804
3Cited by12 opinions
- Chapel-High Corp. v. CavallaroSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1954
- Hendon v. WhiteSupreme Court of Alabama · 1875
- Camp v. CampSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1824
- Bickart v. SanditzSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1927
- Gilbert v. JessWisconsin Supreme Court · 1872
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.