M'Nutt v. Arnott

Indiana Supreme Court

M'Nutt v. Arnott

5 Blackf. 95, 1839 Ind. LEXIS 23

DecidedMay 22, 1839

StatusPublished

This text of 5 Blackf. 95 (M'Nutt v. Arnott) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Indiana Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

M'Nutt v. Arnott, 5 Blackf. 95, 1839 Ind. LEXIS 23 (Ind. 1839).

Pincite

Opinion

TRESPASS for breaking the plaintiff’s close and cutting his timber thereon. Pleas, 1. Not guilty; 2. That a state road was established running through said close, and that the defendant, as a commissioner of the road, entered on the close and cut down and removed th.e trees growing in the road, &c. New assignment, that the 'suit was not only for the trespasses mentioned in the plea, but also for other trespasses out of the road. Plea to the new assignment, not guilty.

Held, that the plaintiff by new assigning, without denying the special plea, admitted the existence and validity of the state road, and the defendant’s authority as set forth in the plea, and confined the issue to such trespasses as were alleged in the new assignment. 1 Chitt. Pl. 665.—1 Saund. 300, a, b, c, note.—2 Camp. 175.—White v. Conover, post, 462.

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

TRESPASS for breaking the plaintiff’s close and cutting his timber thereon. Pleas, 1. Not guilty; 2. That a state road was established running through said close, and that the defendant, as a commissioner of the road, entered on the close and cut down and removed th.e trees growing in the road, &c. New assignment, that the 'suit was not only for the trespasses mentioned in the plea, but also for other trespasses out of the road. Plea to the new assignment, not guilty.

Held, that the plaintiff by new assigning, without denying the special plea, admitted the existence and validity of the state road, and the defendant’s authority as set forth in the plea, and confined the issue to such trespasses as were alleged in the new assignment. 1 Chitt. Pl. 665.—1 Saund. 300, a, b, c, note.—2 Camp. 175.—White v. Conover, post, 462.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

5 Blackf. 95, 1839 Ind. LEXIS 23, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mnutt-v-arnott-ind-1839.