De injuria
Defined in 5 dictionaries — Ballentine's (1916), Black's (1910), Black's (1891), Burrill (1850), Bouvier (1839)
Ballentine's Law Dictionary
James A. Ballentine · 1916
Black's Law Dictionary
Henry Campbell Black, M.A. · 1910
A Dictionary of Law
Henry Campbell Black · 1891
Of [his own] wrong, In the technical language of pleading, a replication de injuria is one that may be made in an action of tort where the defendant has admitted the acts complained of, but alleges, in his plea, certain new matter by way of justification or excuse; by this repliealion the plaintiff avers that the defendant committed the grievances in question “of his own wrong, and without any such cause,” or motive or excuse, as that alleged in the plea, (de injuria sua propria absgue tali causa,) or, admitting part of the matter pleaded, “without the rest of the cause” allezed, K (absque residuo cause.) In form it is a species of traverse, and it is frequently used when the pleading of the defendant, in answer to which it is directed, consists merely of matter of excuse of the alleged trespass, grievance, breach of contract, or other cause of action. Its comprehensive character in putting in issue all the material facts of the defendant’s plea has
A New Law Dictionary and Glossary
Alexander M. Burrill · 1850
See infra.
A Law Dictionary, Adapted to the Constitution and Laws of the United States
John Bouvier · 1839
pleading. The name of a replication in an action for a tort, that the defendant committed the trespasses or grievances of his own wrong without the cause by him in his plea alleged. The import of this replication is to insist that the defendant committed the act complained of, from a motive and impulse altogether different from that insisted on by the plea. For example, if the defendant has justified a battery under a writ of capias, having averred as he must do, that the arrest was made by virtue of the writ; the plaintiff may reply de in- Juria sua propria absque tals causa, that the defendant did the act of his own wrong, without the cause by himalleged. This replication, then, has the effect of denying the alleged motive contained in the plea, and to insist that the defendant acted from another, which was unlawful, and not in consequence of the one insisted upon in his plea. Steph. Pl. 186; 2 Chit. Pl. 523, 642; Hamm. N. P. 120, 121; Arch. Civ. Pl. 264; Com. Dig. Pleader, F 19. The replication de tnyurta is only allowed when an excuse is offered for personal injuries. 1 B. & P.76; 5 Johns. R. 112; 4 Johns. 150; 12 Johns. 491. Vide 7 Vin. Ab. 503; 3 Saund. 295, note 1; 1 Lilly’s Reg. 587.