Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

9 Iowa 51

Dyson v. Ream

Supreme Court of Iowa

Decided June 15, 1859

Supreme Court of Iowa · decided 1859-06-15

This is an action wherein the plaintiff claimed the sum of one hundred dollars, as justly due him from defendant, by reason of his wrongfully taking from the possession of the plaintiff, and converting to his own use, a quantity of corn, standing and growing in the field, of the property of plaintiff, and to his damage, one hundred dollars.

Decided 1859-06-15

Stockton, J.

¶1At the common law, in an action of tres-

¶2pass to personal property, the plea of “not guilty” was proper, if the plaintiff had no property in the goods, or the defendant was not guilty of the taking. So, if he did take the goods, but they did not belong to the plaintiff, the plea of tho general issue- was proper. Stephens’ Pleading, 195; 1 Chitty’s Pleading, 538.

¶3Under the system of pleading inaugurated by our Code, there is, strictly speaking, no general issue. The defence relied upon, must be pleaded.1 If reliance is placed on the fact, that defendant did not commit the grievances complained of, a denial of the facts alleged is sufficient. If, *53however, the defence is, that the property did not belong to the plaintiff, but belonged to the defendant, the answer must set up these facts, before the defendant can be allowed to prove them on the trial.

¶4Judgment affirmed.

¶5Walters v. Washington Insurance Company, 1 Iowa 404: Hutchinson v. Sangster, 4 G. Greene 340 : Bowen & King v. Hale, 4 Iowa 430 : Hagan v. Burch, 8 Ib 310.

/9/iowa/51 · .json · Public domain