Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

6 Binn. 32

Moulson v. Rees

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided June 2, 1813

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · decided 1813-06-02

IN ERROR. TT' RROR to Northumberland, m which county Rees issued rl . _ _ , . , i a capias m case, and referred it to arbitrators, who awarded “ that the defendant below should deliver a' certain a ¿eed poll to Sees, pay all costs of suit, and damage six-i it *«* “ teen dollars. _. . . , , . , ihe exceptions taken to the record were, 1. ihat the ac-**011 was arbitrated by the plaintiff below, and tried by the arbitrators, before the plaintiff in error entered special bail,…

Cited by 3 later decisions — most recently December 1835

3 state decisions

Relies on Hertzog v. Ellis

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1813-06-02

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Tilghman G. J.

¶1delivered judgment.

¶2The arbitration maybe entered at anytime after the issuing of the writ, which is the -commencement of the suit, according to the opinion of the Court in Hertzog v. Ellis, 3 Binn. 209. The plaintiff in this case, although a capias *33was issued, has dispensed with special bail, as he had a right to do; and this is for the advantage of the defendant. As to the cause of action, it sufficiently appears on the record, that the matter in dispute was a deed, which was described in the award, and for the conversion of which, sixteen dollars damages are given. I consider the action as Trover,^nd the judgment as relating to the damages only, and not to the delivery of the deed'. As for the mistake in the date of the act, it is immaterial. It is a public act, of which the .Court must take notice. The mentioning of it by the prothonotary in entering the rule, of reference, was surplusage. Besides the title of the act is properly given, although the date is. mistaken.

¶3Judgment affirmed.

/6/binn/32 · .json · Public domain