Sherer v. Hodgson
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
In error. Writ of error to the Court of Common Pleas of Chester county. was plaintiff below, in an assize of nuisance, instituted against Robert M. Sherer, the plaintiff in error, for raising “ a certain dam of water in the townships of East Nottingham and New London in the said cpunty, to the nuisance of the freehold of the said James Hodgson,” &c.
Read the full summary
In error. Writ of error to the Court of Common Pleas of Chester county. was plaintiff below, in an assize of nuisance, instituted against Robert M. Sherer, the plaintiff in error, for raising “ a certain dam of water in the townships of East Nottingham and New London in the said cpunty, to the nuisance of the freehold of the said James Hodgson,” &c. The defendant, on the third.of November, Í829, pleaded “not guilty, &c.” and by consent df parties, the assize was adjourned to the twenty-second of February, 1830, when the defendant pleaded in abatement “ that pending the same writ and since the…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Gibson, C. J.
The rejected plea was, in substance and in form, a plea in abatement. It was founded on a supposititious note of Lord Hale to a passage in Fitzherbert, where it is said that if the defendant abate the nuisance pending the assise, the writ shall abate also. If that were so, the author of a nuisance might foil the injured party forever by removing the cause of offence pending the assise, and replacing it as soon as he had abated the writ and soused the plaintiff in costs. Were the word plaintiff put for defendant, we could comprehend how the…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Wilson v. HamiltonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1818
3Cited by2 opinions
- Crawford v. AstrueDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · 2009
- Stille v. ShullSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1889