Hurst v. Carlisle

3 Pen. & W. 176
CourtSupreme Court of Pennsylvania
DecidedSeptember 15, 1831
StatusPublished

This text of 3 Pen. & W. 176 (Hurst v. Carlisle) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Hurst v. Carlisle, 3 Pen. & W. 176 (Pa. 1831).

Opinion

The opinion of the eourt was delivered by

Rogers, J.

This is a ease as plain on authority; as it is reasonable and just. For battery, wounding or mayhem, or for an attempt to commit any of these, (which in law is termed an assault,\ the injured party may have a remedy in damages, by action of trespass. Arch. 25. Even for a threat, or menace, to commit any of these injuries. Rey. 104. 2. Rol. 545, Nos. 25, 41, or to pull a man’s house down. Rey. 108, or the like. If any injury arise W the party from such threat or menace, the remedy, it seems, is also by action of trespass. Vide. Com. Dig. Battery D. and the authorities there cited;

Judgment affirmed;

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
3 Pen. & W. 176, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hurst-v-carlisle-pa-1831.