Εικόνες σελίδας
PDF
Ηλεκτρ. έκδοση

TRADING.

See BANKRUPTCY, 2.

TRESPASS.

See PLEADING, 2.

1. Defendant entered Plaintiff's 1.
house in search of S., against
whom he had a warrant signed
by the commissioners of the South-
wark Court of Requests. S. was
not in the house:

Held, that Defendant, as acting in pursuance of the Court of Requests' Act, 46 G. 3. c. 87. s. 21., was entitled to notice of an action of trespass. Cook v. Clark.

Page 19 2. In an action against Defendant for taking Plaintiff to a police office, and causing him to be imprisoned without reasonable or probable cause, on a charge that he had uttered menaces against the Defendant's life, Held that it was not for the Judge alone to determine whether the menaces justified the charge, but that it should have been left to the jury to determine whether the Defendant believed the menaces, before the Judge decided whether or not there was reasonable and probable cause for the charge. Venafra v. Johnson, Clerk. 301 3. The Defendant hired a steamboat for an excursion to Richmond, the owner's captain navigating the vessel: Held that the Defendant had not such a possession as to justify him in forcibly turning out VOL. X.

a stranger whom the captain had allowed to come on board. Dean v. Hogg and Another. Page 345

TROVER.

See SHERIFF, 1.

After verdict for Plaintiff in trover, the goods were seized in the hands of Defendant for rent due to A., which the Plaintiff was liable to pay: Defendant having paid the rent, the Court allowed him to deduct the amount from the verdict found for Plaintiff. Plevin v. Henshall and Another.

24 2. In 1830 the Plaintiff had his pocket picked of a 2001. banknote, at a public meeting.

The note was paid to the Defendant, as he said, upon a bet on the Derby in 1832; but he could not say by whom: Held, that the Plaintiff was entitled to recover in trover. Easley v. Crockford. 243 3. W., possessed of a Stockton

wharfinger's receipt for goods about to be shipped to London, assigned the receipt to Plaintiff, together with an order to Defendant, a London wharfinger, to deliver the goods to Plaintiff: Defendant, on sight of the order before the goods arrived, promised to deliver them to Plaintiff on their arrival:

Held, that Plaintiff might maintain trover against him, on his refusal to deliver after arrival. Holl v. Griffin and Another.

Q q

246

TRUS

[blocks in formation]

VENUE.

See PLEADING, 7. PRACTICE, 1.

Held, that the Defendant was not exempted from personal responsibility by 7 & 8. G. 4. c. 2. VIRTUTE CUJUS, TRAVERSE s. 3. Parrott v. Eyre. Page 283

OF.

[blocks in formation]
[ocr errors][ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
« ΠροηγούμενηΣυνέχεια »