Dolloff v. Danforth

Decided December 15, 1861

Supreme Court of New Hampshire · decided 1861-12-15

Trespass quare clausum fregit and for cutting down and carrying away ten acres of the plaintiff’s grass. Plea, the general issue with a brief statement.

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1861-12-15

How this case has been cited

Cited by 3 later decisions — most recently January 1915

3 state decisions

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Bartlett, J.

¶1The only question raised in the case is whether the plaintiff upon his own evidence can maintain trespass quare clausum. We think he can; his agreement with Sanderson entitled him to the exclusive enjoyment of the crop standing on the land during the proper period of its full growth and removal; and such exclusive right would enable him to maintain trespass quare clausum against any stranger who wrongfully enters and cuts and carries away the grass. Crosby v. Wadsworth, 6 East 603; 2 Hill. Torts 8; 2 Greenl. Ev., sec. 614; 2 Saund. Pl. and Ev. 867; Waddington v. Bristow, 2 B. & P. 542. The fact that Sanderson agreed to cut the grass as his servant, does not alter the case.

¶2Judgment on the verdict.