McGunnigle v. Blake

U.S. Circuit Court for the District of District of Columbia

McGunnigle v. Blake

16 F. Cas. 145, 3 D.C. 64, 3 Cranch 64

CourtU.S. Circuit Court for the District of District of Columbia

DecidedDecember 15, 1826

StatusPublished

This text of 16 F. Cas. 145 (McGunnigle v. Blake) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering U.S. Circuit Court for the District of District of Columbia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

McGunnigle v. Blake, 16 F. Cas. 145, 3 D.C. 64, 3 Cranch 64 (circtddc 1826).

Pincite

Opinion

The Court said that in an action for mere use and occupation, not founded on an express contract for an entire rent, eviction of part is not a bar to the whole action; because the plaintiff is entitled to recover damages for the actual use and occupation ; and if the defendant was deprived of the use for a certain part of the time, and afterwards resumed the occupation and use of the premises, the jury will consider that circumstance in estimating the damages.

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

The Court said that in an action for mere use and occupation, not founded on an express contract for an entire rent, eviction of part is not a bar to the whole action; because the plaintiff is entitled to recover damages for the actual use and occupation ; and if the defendant was deprived of the use for a certain part of the time, and afterwards resumed the occupation and use of the premises, the jury will consider that circumstance in estimating the damages.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

16 F. Cas. 145, 3 D.C. 64, 3 Cranch 64, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mcgunnigle-v-blake-circtddc-1826.