Legal Opinion

Hankins v. Lawrence

Indiana Supreme Court

Decided December 3, 1846PublishedCited by 17 opinions

ERROR to the Fayette Circuit Court.

1Opinion of the CourtBlackford, J.

This was an action of trespass quare clau-. sum fregit, brought by Hankins for breaking and entering his close, digging holes in the same, &c. Plea, that, at, &c., the defendant was an engineer in the employment of the White Water Valley Canal Company; that by virtue of their charter and in pursuance of their order, he entered the close' and took possession of an acre of land adjoining a certain lock and hydraulic power on the canal, situate, &c.; that said acre of land was and is necessary for a site for erecting, and propelling by water, a grist-mill, oil-mill, carding machine, and woolen…

Also in this document: Per curiam.

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Rubottom v. M'ClureIndiana Supreme Court · 1838

3Cited by17 opinions

  1. Snowden v. WilasIndiana Supreme Court · 1862
  2. Prather v. Jeffersonville, Madison & Indianapolis RailroadIndiana Supreme Court · 1875
  3. Anderson v. Kerns Draining Co.Indiana Supreme Court · 1860
  4. Ryerson v. BrownMichigan Supreme Court · 1877
  5. Sheets v. Vandalia Railway Co.Indiana Court of Appeals · 1920

12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API