Legal Opinion

Faget v. Braxton

Court of Appeals of Maryland

Decided June 15, 1806PublishedCited by 1 opinion

Appeal from Baltimore County Court. Replevin for a cow. The declaration did not allege any damage to havo been sustained by tlie plaint iff, (now appellee.) At the trial the defendant, (the appellant.) prayed the court to direct the jury, that as the plaintiff had declared the taking of the cow in question to have been in Gay-street, lrom the dwelling house of the plaintiff, it was incumbent on him, in order to entitle him to recover, not only to prove that the taking was in…

Read the full summary

Appeal from Baltimore County Court. Replevin for a cow. The declaration did not allege any damage to havo been sustained by tlie plaint iff, (now appellee.) At the trial the defendant, (the appellant.) prayed the court to direct the jury, that as the plaintiff had declared the taking of the cow in question to have been in Gay-street, lrom the dwelling house of the plaintiff, it was incumbent on him, in order to entitle him to recover, not only to prove that the taking was in Gay-street,, but to prove that it was from the house of the plaintiff in that street. The court, (II. Bidgely, Ch. J.)…

1Opinion of the Court

The Court

concurred with the county court in the «pinion expressed in the, bill of exceptions; but reversed the judgment, because no damages were laid in the declaration.

JUDGMENT REVERSED.

2Cited by1 opinion

  1. Treusch v. KamkeCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1885

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API