Murdock v. Ripley
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
On Exceptions from Nisi Prius, Howard, J., presiding. Assault and Battery. An officer held a warrant for service against one Bridgham, and employed the defendant to aid in serving it. In attempting to arrest Bridgham, the officer was resisted by this plaintiff. To repel that resistance, this defendant inflicted the violence for which this suit is brought.
Read the full summary
On Exceptions from Nisi Prius, Howard, J., presiding. Assault and Battery. An officer held a warrant for service against one Bridgham, and employed the defendant to aid in serving it. In attempting to arrest Bridgham, the officer was resisted by this plaintiff. To repel that resistance, this defendant inflicted the violence for which this suit is brought. The plaintiff, admitting the right of the defendant, as an aid to the officer, to repel and overcome the resistance made by the plaintiff, contended that the force used by the defendant was greater than the occasion justified. Evidence upon…
1Opinion of the Court
Wells J.
— The defendant, acting as the aid of the officer in making the arrest of Bridgham, was justified in using such force as was necessary to overcome the resistance of the plaintiff. If he used more force than was necessary to accomplish that purpose, he b.ecame a trespasser. 1 Chit. Plead. 164. Cockroft v. Smith, 2 Salk. 641.
The plaintiff, by his resistance, may be considered as contributing to the injury, which, it is alleged, he received, but *475that resistance could not justify unnecessary violence. The fault of the plaintiff in the first instance would afford no justification for the…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Kamel Chaney-Snell v. Andrew YoungCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2024
- Hilton v. StateSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1975
- Bale v. RyderSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1972