Climson v. Poole

Decided July 1, 1793

The condition of the obligation was, that the plaintiff should have free egress, ingress and regrets in the house of I. S. The defendant pleaded that he had egress, ingress and regress, without saying free ingress &c. It is a bad bar. The plaintiff replied that he had shut all the outward gates. In this case the plaintiff has a right to part of the house, viz. to the chambers; therefore he ought not to be barred of his entry.

Decided 1793-07-01

Doderidge, J,

¶1It has been pleaded that he shut the doors continually; otherwise it would be as my brother Jones has said. If I am obliged to let I. S. have a way over my land and I lock my gates; the condition is broken; for I cannot compel him to go over the fences or send to me for the keys. It seems to me there is a difference between the case of a field and that of a house; as a house is the owner’s castle and ought to be kept with more caution than a field, as appears by 5 Rep.

¶2Sed the parties agreed, post. p. 146. Bendl. 172.