Britton v. Moody

Court of Appeals of Kentucky

Britton v. Moody

28 Ky. 399, 5 J.J. Marsh. 399, 1831 Ky. LEXIS 52

DecidedApril 9, 1831

StatusPublished

This text of 28 Ky. 399 (Britton v. Moody) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Kentucky primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Britton v. Moody, 28 Ky. 399, 5 J.J. Marsh. 399, 1831 Ky. LEXIS 52 (Ky. Ct. App. 1831).

Pincite

Opinion

Chief Justice Robertson

delivered the opinion of the court.

Moody recovered a judgment for damages against Britton, in an action of trespass quare clausum fregit. As tire testimony proved that Britton was in the actual possession of the loci# in quo, as a tenant of Moody, at the date of the alleged treapffss, his counsel moved ior a nonsuit, and afterwards for a new trial, which the court overruled.

i,, . . The court ought to have sustained the motion lor a nonsuit. No person, but one in the actual possession, can maintain trespass quare. clausum fregit. No doctrine of the law is more clearly or more firmly settled than this. As Moody owned the reversion, his remedy was “ case.” lor waste, or for special damage, to the me.rsion. There can have been no trespass on his possession. 1

Judgment reversed, and cause remanded for a new Í rifil.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Chief Justice Robertson

delivered the opinion of the court.

Moody recovered a judgment for damages against Britton, in an action of trespass quare clausum fregit. As tire testimony proved that Britton was in the actual possession of the loci# in quo, as a tenant of Moody, at the date of the alleged treapffss, his counsel moved ior a nonsuit, and afterwards for a new trial, which the court overruled.

i,, . . The court ought to have sustained the motion lor a nonsuit. No person, but one in the actual possession, can maintain trespass quare. clausum fregit. No doctrine of the law is more clearly or more firmly settled than this. As Moody owned the reversion, his remedy was “ case.” lor waste, or for special damage, to the me.rsion. There can have been no trespass on his possession. 1

Judgment reversed, and cause remanded for a new Í rifil.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

28 Ky. 399, 5 J.J. Marsh. 399, 1831 Ky. LEXIS 52, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/britton-v-moody-kyctapp-1831.