Wunsch v. Gretel

26 Mo. 580
CourtSupreme Court of Missouri
DecidedMarch 15, 1858
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 26 Mo. 580 (Wunsch v. Gretel) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Missouri primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Wunsch v. Gretel, 26 Mo. 580 (Mo. 1858).

Opinion

Richardson, Judge,

delivered the opinion of the court.

The sixteenth section of the first article of the act of 1845 concerning forcible entry and detainer, declares that “ the complainant shall not be compelled to make further proof of the forcible entry or detainer than that the defendant unlawfully entered into and detained the same.” The purpose of the statute is to prevent the intrusion of one person on the lawful possession of another without his consent, and to secure a peaceable possession from being changed without authority of law against the will of the occupant. This section of the act excludes the idea that force is a necessary ingredient to give a right of action; and, though neither violencé nor threats are used, a party may be guilty of forci[581]*581ble entry and detainer. (Warren v. Ritter, 11 Mo. 354; Cathcart v. Walter, 14 Mo. 17; Krevet v. Meyer, 24 Mo. 107.) The court, at the instance of the defendant, instructed the jury that it was “ incumbent on the plaintiff to prove force in getting possession of the premises, or such words and actions used by defendant to the plaintiff as have a natural tendency to excite fear or apprehension of danger to the person. in possession, or he can not recover.” The giving of this instruction and the refusal of those asked by the plaintiff indicate that the case was put to the jury on an improper theory. Whether the plaintiff voluntarily abandoned the possession, or the defendant did any thing towards a disturbance of the plaintiff’s possession, are questions of fact for the jury, about which we intimate no opinion.

The other judges concurring, the judgment will be reversed and the cause remanded.

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

Related

Meiers v. Pinover
21 Ill. App. 551 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1886)
McCartney v. Auer
50 Mo. 395 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1872)
Spalding v. Mayhall
27 Mo. 377 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1858)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
26 Mo. 580, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wunsch-v-gretel-mo-1858.