Newton & Muncaster v. Reardon

Decided July 15, 1812

Case, for use and occupation of land at Oecoquan in Virginia. contended that an action for use and occupation did not lie before the statute,of 11 Geo. 2, c. 19, § 14, and that as that act is not in force in Virginia, no such action could be maintained in Alexandria county which is governed by the laws of Virginia as they existed in 1801. Bsp. N. P. 19; Green v. Harrington, Ilutt. 34; 1 Bac. Ab. 257, Gwillim’s Ed.; Wilkins v. Wingate, 6 T. R. 62; Brett v. Read, Cro. Car. 343.

Decided 1812-07-15

Cranch, C. J.,

¶1after reviewing authorities, cited, All the cases in which it has been held that the defendant must plead joint-tenancy, or tenancy in common of the plaintiff with others in abatement, are cases of tort.

¶2In cases of contract, whether express or implied, the defendant may show in evidence upon the general issue, that other persons than the plaintiffs are equally entitled to sue. I therefore think we were correct in the opinion which we gave at that trial and would refuse to reinstate the cause. And of this opinion was the whole Court.

¶3In addition to the eases cited in the argument, the following were noticed by the Court: Dockwray v. Dickenson, Skinner, 640; S. C. Comb. 366; Harman v. Witchlow, Latch, 152; Child v. Sands, Salk. 32; Brown v. Hedges, Salk. 290 ; Garrett v. Taylor, Esp. N. P. 117.