Williams v. Dixon

Decided June 15, 1871

Supreme Court of North Carolina · decided 1871-06-15

This was an action of trespass vi et armis brought under the .©Id system, and tried before Towrgee, J., at Spring Term, 1871, of Person Superior Court. The plaintiff’s declaration alleged that defendant had killed an ass belonging to the plaintiff, to his damage three hundred dollars. The facts were, that the plaintiff bought the animal from one Barnett, with a full knowledge that he was dangerous and had a propensity for injuring and killing stock.

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1871-06-15

How this case has been cited

Cited by 4 later decisions — most recently October 1911

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 →

Eodman, J.

¶1There is no error. The rule laid down by Ms Honor is supported by the cases of Parrott v. Hartsfield, 4 D. & B. 110, and Morse v. Nixon, 6 Jones, 84. It is objected however, that it appeared upon the evidence that at the moment when the ass was shot he had turned off from the cow, and therefore the killing could not be justified as being neces-' sary to protect the property of the defendant.

¶2But we are of opinion, that this question was fairly left to-, the jury, and that there was evidence in support of their finding.

¶3With the weight of the evidence we have nothing to do.

¶4Per Curiam. Judgment affirmed.