Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

34 Mass. 78

Dickinson v. Boyle

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided September 15, 1835

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · decided 1835-09-15

.Trespass quare clausum fregit. The declaration ret forth, that the defendant, on October, 9, 1833, with force and arms, broke and entered the plaintiff’s close, lying adjacent to Westfield river, in Russell, and broke up and removed the plaintiff’s soil, and by means thereof caused the water of the river to carry away and destroy three acres of the close, the plaintiff’s cider-mill there standing, twenty barrels of cider, &c. The trial was before Putnam J., upon the general…

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently July 1959

1 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1835-09-15

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Per Curiam.

¶1Where the act complained of, is admitted to have been done with force, and to constitute a proper ground for an action of trespass vi et armis, all the damage to the plaintiff, of which such injurious act was the efficient cause, and for which the plaintiff is entitled to recover in any form, may be recovered in such action, although in point of time such damage did not occur till some time after the act done. Where special or peculiar damages are claimed, such as are not the usual or natural consequences of the act done, it is proper to set them forth specifically in the declaration, by way of aggravation, that the defendant may have due notice of the claim.

¶2Judgment on the verdict for the plaintiff.

/34/mass/78 · .json · Public domain