Legal Opinion

Beyer v. Tanner

Illinois Supreme Court

Decided April 15, 1862PublishedCited by 1 opinion

The plaintiff below, Tanner, filed a declaration in trespass, containing three counts ; in the first of which it is charged that the defendants, on the first day of December, 1860, and on divers other days between that time and the commencement of this suit, broke and entered plaintiff’s close, to wit, the north-west quarter of section six, in the township of Aurora, in Kane county, and destroyed the fence, and trod down and destroyed grass and wheat.

Read the full summary

The plaintiff below, Tanner, filed a declaration in trespass, containing three counts ; in the first of which it is charged that the defendants, on the first day of December, 1860, and on divers other days between that time and the commencement of this suit, broke and entered plaintiff’s close, to wit, the north-west quarter of section six, in the township of Aurora, in Kane county, and destroyed the fence, and trod down and destroyed grass and wheat. The second count for trespass at the same times upon northeast quarter of section one, in the township of Sugar Grove in said county, by…

1Opinion of the CourtBreese, J.

We have not been favored by either party with any arguments in this case, they choosing to submit it on the record alone..

We have examined the record, and the plats of the road, and the testimony of all the witnesses, and our minds have reached the same conclusion at which the jury arrived. We think there can be little doubt, that Wilder’s survey is the true survey of the road. That, and his testimony, for he testifies like a man of sense and as one well informed on the subject, must have convinced the jury, as it has convinced us, that the true line of the old State road, which was about to…

2Cited by1 opinion

  1. Hall v. RoulstonSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1902

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

Powered by the Exa API