Moore v. Duke
Supreme Court of Vermont
Trespass quare clausum. Plea, the general issue with notice of license. Trial by jury at the September Term, 1910, Washington County, Hall, J., presiding. Verdict and judgment for the plaintiff. The defendant excepted. The opinion states the case. The abuse of a license in fact will not make an officer a trespasser ab initio.
Read the full summary
Trespass quare clausum. Plea, the general issue with notice of license. Trial by jury at the September Term, 1910, Washington County, Hall, J., presiding. Verdict and judgment for the plaintiff. The defendant excepted. The opinion states the case. The abuse of a license in fact will not make an officer a trespasser ab initio. Stone v. Knapp, 29 Vt. 501; Six Carpenters’ Case, 8 Coke 146. Even if the license to go to the village clerk’s office is treated as a license in law, what the defendant did could not make him a trespasser, because in such a case he cannot become a trespasser ab initio…
1Opinion of the CourtPowers, J.
The declaration in this action of trespass to the freehold contains two counts: one charges a trespass to the plaintiff’s dwelling-house; the other, a trespass to the lot on which the dwelling stood. The defendants severed in their pleas — each filing the general issue with notice of a license in fact.
The plaintiff was clerk of the incorporated village of Plain-field, and as such had the custody of its books of record, including one which contained, among other things, the record of building permits granted by the village. These records were kept by the plaintiff at his dwelling in a certain…
2Cases cited28 opinions
- Lake Shore & Michigan Southern Railway Co. v. PrenticeSupreme Court of the United States · 1893
- District of Columbia v. WoodburySupreme Court of the United States · 1890
- Stanton v. New York & Eastern Railway Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1890
- Chandler v. SpearSupreme Court of Vermont · 1850
- Krug v. . PitassNew York Court of Appeals · 1900
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by27 opinions
- Suburban Propane, a Division of National Distillers and Chemical Corp. v. Proctor Gas, Inc., and James TaranovichCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1992
- Woodhouse v. Woodhouse Et Ux.Supreme Court of Vermont · 1925
- Snow v. City of ColumbiaCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 1991
- Harris v. CarbonneauSupreme Court of Vermont · 1996
- Dunshee v. Standard Oil CompanySupreme Court of Iowa · 1914
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.