Simonds v. Barton
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Error to the District Court of Allegheny eounty: Of October and November Term 1874, No. 250. This was an action of trespass q. o. brought to July Term 1'872, of the court below, by Edward B. Barton against John .■Simonds, George Simonds and James Simonds.
Read the full summary
Error to the District Court of Allegheny eounty: Of October and November Term 1874, No. 250. This was an action of trespass q. o. brought to July Term 1'872, of the court below, by Edward B. Barton against John .■Simonds, George Simonds and James Simonds. The declaration was that the plaintiff was seised in fee of an island in the Allegheny river, and the defendants “ with force and arms ¡broke ’into and upon said close, and with flats and boats and other crafts, seized, took and carried away ten thousand bushels of sand (of which said ' island is partially composed) of the value of five…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Mercur
This was an action of trespass. The jury rendered a verdict in favor of the plaintiff below for five dollars. Seven and a half months thereafter the judge certified,that the freehold or title of the land mentioned in the declaration was chiefly in question. This was more than three months after the motion for a new trial had been overruled, and nearly two months after judgment had actually been entered on the verdict. Was the certificate in time to make it effectual ?
When the damages found by the jury are under the value of forty shillings ($5.33§-) and the statute of 22 & 23 Car. 2 requires…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Knappenberger v. RothSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1893
- Huray v. Penarski, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Sullivan County1935
- Starr v. Thompson, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Butler County1921