Roberts v. Dame
Superior Court of New Hampshire
Tbespass, for breaking and entering the plaintiff’s close in Rochester, hounded, &c., destroying the plaintiff’s crops, throwing down the foundation wall for a dwelling house, breaking down and destroying the plaintiffs fence, and building a fence across the premises. The action was commenced before a justice of the peace.
Read the full summary
Tbespass, for breaking and entering the plaintiff’s close in Rochester, hounded, &c., destroying the plaintiff’s crops, throwing down the foundation wall for a dwelling house, breaking down and destroying the plaintiffs fence, and building a fence across the premises. The action was commenced before a justice of the peace. Upon the return of the writ before the magistrate, the defendants, Caleb Dame, and James Dame, filed a plea in bar, i( that as to the force and arms, or any thing against the peace, and also the whole trespass aforesaid, except the breaking and entering the close aforesaid,…
1Opinion of the CourtParker, C. J.
There is no ground in this case for entering judgment for the plaintiff notwithstanding the verdict. *229Where a plea confesses the action, and does not sufficiently avoid it, judgment is given on the confession, without regard to a verdict for the defendant. 2 Tidd's Pr. 828; 2 Ld. Raym. 924, Staples vs. Heydon; 1 Salk. 173: 1 Strange 394, Rex vs. Phillips; Willes 364, Broadbent vs. Wilks; 1 Wils. 65, S. C. in Error; Cro. Eliz. 214, Lucy vs. Reynolds; Carth. 370, Jones vs. Bodinner.
The plea in this case, certainly, does not confess the action without avoiding it. It covers the entry, and seems…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Keay v. GoodwinMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1819
- Odiorne v. LyfordSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1838