Legal Opinion

Hamblett v. Bennett

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided January 15, 1863PublishedCited by 1 opinion

Tort to recover damages for an assault and battery upon the female plaintiff, and for breaking and entering the plaintiffs’ close, to wit, the hall in the basement of the Universalist church in Tyngsborough, and expelling the female plaintiff therefrom.

Read the full summary

Tort to recover damages for an assault and battery upon the female plaintiff, and for breaking and entering the plaintiffs’ close, to wit, the hall in the basement of the Universalist church in Tyngsborough, and expelling the female plaintiff therefrom. The answer denied the assault, and alleged that whatever acts were done by the defendant were done by him in a proper manner and without undue force, as agent of the Proprietors of the First Universalist Meeting-house in Tyngsborough, to whom the premises belonged. At the trial in the superior court, before Vose, J., there was evidence tending…

1Opinion of the Court

Hoar, J,

It will not be necessary to consider at length all the questions which have been or might be raised in this case, because a few considerations seem to be decisive of it. The action is tort for an assault and battery, and for breaking and entering the plaintiffs’ close, to wit, the hall in the basement of the Universalist church in Tyngsborough; and the case turns *144upon the right of possession of that hall at the time of the alleged tort.

The land was conveyed by its former owner, by a deed dated August 19, 1841, to “ the society called the Proprietors of the Fúst Universalist…

2Cited by1 opinion

  1. Venable v. Ebenezer Baptist Church of AtchisonSupreme Court of Kansas · 1881

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

Powered by the Exa API