Wells v. Hubbard

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

Wells v. Hubbard

29 F. Cas. 657, 2 D.C. 292, 2 Cranch 292

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

DecidedApril 15, 1822

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 29 F. Cas. 657 (Wells v. Hubbard) 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

Wells v. Hubbard, 29 F. Cas. 657, 2 D.C. 292, 2 Cranch 292 (circtddc 1822).

Pincite

Opinion

The Court

(Thruston, J., absent,)

was of opinion, that the constable was not, as constable, justified by the warrant, because the justice had no jurisdiction to grant such a warrant. That the right to break open the doors, was the right of the landlord, or his bailiff, as such. That the constable is required to be present only to keep the peace, and that, even then, if the goods be not found in the house, the constable who breaks open the doors, is liable to an action of trespass. Verdict for plaintiff.

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

The Court

(Thruston, J., absent,)

was of opinion, that the constable was not, as constable, justified by the warrant, because the justice had no jurisdiction to grant such a warrant. That the right to break open the doors, was the right of the landlord, or his bailiff, as such. That the constable is required to be present only to keep the peace, and that, even then, if the goods be not found in the house, the constable who breaks open the doors, is liable to an action of trespass. Verdict for plaintiff.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

29 F. Cas. 657, 2 D.C. 292, 2 Cranch 292, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wells-v-hubbard-circtddc-1822.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack