Shaw v. . Etheridge
Supreme Court of North Carolina
This was an action of trespass on the case, tried before his Honor, Judge Manly, at the Spring Term, 1856, of Currituck Superior Court. The action was brought for obstructing a ditch which traversed the land of the plaintiff and passed through a part of the land of the defendant. Both these parcels of land had belonged to tbe defendant until the 9th of November, 1853, when he conveyed to plaintiff the part now in question, which was the upper part of the same.
Read the full summary
This was an action of trespass on the case, tried before his Honor, Judge Manly, at the Spring Term, 1856, of Currituck Superior Court. The action was brought for obstructing a ditch which traversed the land of the plaintiff and passed through a part of the land of the defendant. Both these parcels of land had belonged to tbe defendant until the 9th of November, 1853, when he conveyed to plaintiff the part now in question, which was the upper part of the same. Previously to this conveyance, to wit, in September of that year, the defendant had cut the ditch in question. It was in evidence,…
1Opinion of the CourtBattle, J.
We do not discover any error in the charge of his Honor except in relation to the question of damages. Upon the facts as they are stated in the bill of exceptions, his Honor was justified in instructing the jury that they might find for the plaintiff. The case of Hazard v. Robinson, 3 Mason’s Rep. 236, relied upon by the plaintiff’s counsel, is directly in point for him, and the force of it is not at all weakened by the authorities referred to on the part of the defendant.
But the charge of the Court “ that in estimating the damages, the jury might take into account the injury done since the…
Also in this document: Per curiam.
2Cited by2 opinions
- Clark v. Patapsco Guano Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1907
- Jones v. Kramer.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1903