Trespasser

One who does an unlawful act, or a lawful act in an unlawful manner, to the injury of the person or property of another.

— Any act which is injurious to the property of another renders the doer a trespasser, unless he has authority to do it from the owner or custodian; Bradley v. Davis, 14 Me. 44, 30 Am. Dec. 729;

— or by law; Luddington v. Peck, 2 Conn. 700; Warner v. Shed, 10 Johns. (N. Y.) 138; and in this latter case any defect in his authority, as, want of jurisdiction by the court; Allen v. Gray, 11 Conn. 95; Adkins v. Brewer, 3 Cow. (N. Y.) 206, 15 Am, Dec. 264; defective or void proceedings; Baldwin v. Whittier, 16 Me. 33; Allen v. Greenlee, 12 N. C. 370; misapplication of process; Wickliffe v. Sanders, 6 T. B. Monr. (Ky.) 296; renders him liable as a trespasser.

So, too, the commission of a legal act in an illegal manner, as, the execution of legal process illegally; Case v. Shepherd, 2 Johns. Cas. (N. Y.) 27; abuse of legal process; Ragsdale v. Bowles, 16 Ala. 62; exceeding the authority conferred by the owner; Abbott v. Wood, 13 'Me. 115; or by law; Oystead v. Shed, 13 Mass. 520, 7 Am. Dec. 172; Kuhn v. North, 10 S. & R. (Pa.) 399; renders a man a trespasser. A ministerial officer, where it is his duty to act, cannot be made a trespasser; Harding v. Woodcock, 137 U. S. 43, 11 Sup. Ct 6, 34 L. Ed. 580; and acting in obedience to process regular on its face, and issued by a tribunal having jurisdiction and power to issue the process, is not liable for its regular enforcement, although errors may have been committed by the tribunal which issued it; Stutsman Co. v. Wallace, 142 U. S. 293, 12 Sup. Ct. 227, 35 L. Ed. 1018.

See False Imprisonment.

— In all these cases where a man begins an act which is legal by reason of some authority given him, and then becomes a trespasser by subsequent acts, he is held to be a trespasser ab initio (from the beginning), q. v. A person may be a trespasser by ordering such an act done as makes the doer a trespasser; Blake v. Jerome, 14 Johns. (N. Y.) 406;

— or by subsequently assenting, in some cases; Floyd v. Browne, 1 Rawle (Pa.) 121, 18 Am. Dec. 602;

— or assisting, though It seems that a verdict for the plaintiff in qudre clausum fregit does not operate as an estoppel in a subsequent action of ejectment; Stevens v. Hughes, 31 Pa. 381.