Brotherson v. Hodges
New York Supreme Court
THIS was an action of trespass, for breaking and enter™S the plaintiffs’ close, and cutting down, taking and carrying away timber, &c. „ At the trial, it appeared, that Esther Kissam was tenant in common with the plaintiffs, of the land on which the trespass was proved to have been committed ; anc^ was not not joined in the action. On this ground the defendants’ counsel objected to the plaintiffs’ recovery.
Read the full summary
THIS was an action of trespass, for breaking and enter™S the plaintiffs’ close, and cutting down, taking and carrying away timber, &c. „ At the trial, it appeared, that Esther Kissam was tenant in common with the plaintiffs, of the land on which the trespass was proved to have been committed ; anc^ was not not joined in the action. On this ground the defendants’ counsel objected to the plaintiffs’ recovery. The plaintiffs’ counsel acquiescing in the opinion, that all the tenants in common must join, and the judge inclining to the same opinion, a nonsuit was granted. A motion was made to set…
1Per curiam
The nonsuit must be set aside, and a new trial awarded, with costs, to abide the event. Though all the tenants in common do not join in the action of trespass quare clausum fregit, the defendants cannot take advantage of the omission, at the trial, or in any other way than by pleading it in abatement. This is the rule in actions for torts. (1 Saund. 251. note g. h. where the authorities are all collected.)
Rule granted.
2Cited by11 opinions
- Van Hoozier v. Hannibal & St. Joseph RailroadSupreme Court of Missouri · 1879
- Johnson v. RichardsonIllinois Supreme Court · 1855
- Starnes v. QuinSupreme Court of Georgia · 1849
- Brown v. RavenscraftCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1898
- Converse v. SymmesMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1813
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.