Ritchie v. Shannon

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Ritchie v. Shannon

2 Rawle 196, 1828 Pa. LEXIS 111

DecidedNovember 1, 1828

StatusPublished

This text of 2 Rawle 196 (Ritchie v. Shannon) 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

Ritchie v. Shannon, 2 Rawle 196, 1828 Pa. LEXIS 111 (Pa. 1828).

Pincite

Opinion

The opinion of the court was delivered by

Gibson, C. J. —

None of the exceptions merit particular notice, but that which is taken to the form of the verdict.' In every sort of action, it has been almost a' universal practice to take the verdict in this form, arising no doubt from inattention; and for so very small a matter, we should not be astute to overturn a judgment. Perhaps the maxim de ¡minimis, might be applicable to it. Haply, we are relieved from difficulty in this'instance, by the decision in Norris v. Pilmore, 1 Yeates, 408, where it is shown, that a penalty given to the party grieved, accrues at the commission of the offence; and consequently, that there may be damages for detention; but that it is otherwise in the- case of a common informer, who has no interest before judgment. This decision is well founded in technical reason, and supported beside by good authority. The verdict, therefore, is unexceptionable in substance and in form.

Judgment affirmed.

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

The opinion of the court was delivered by

Gibson, C. J. —

None of the exceptions merit particular notice, but that which is taken to the form of the verdict.' In every sort of action, it has been almost a' universal practice to take the verdict in this form, arising no doubt from inattention; and for so very small a matter, we should not be astute to overturn a judgment. Perhaps the maxim de ¡minimis, might be applicable to it. Haply, we are relieved from difficulty in this'instance, by the decision in Norris v. Pilmore, 1 Yeates, 408, where it is shown, that a penalty given to the party grieved, accrues at the commission of the offence; and consequently, that there may be damages for detention; but that it is otherwise in the- case of a common informer, who has no interest before judgment. This decision is well founded in technical reason, and supported beside by good authority. The verdict, therefore, is unexceptionable in substance and in form.

Judgment affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

2 Rawle 196, 1828 Pa. LEXIS 111, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ritchie-v-shannon-pa-1828.