Ditcham v Bond
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 25 February 1814 |
| Date | 25 February 1814 |
| Court | High Court |
English Reports Citation: 170 E.R. 1469
IN THE COURTS OF KING'S BENCH AND COMMON PLEAS
Subsequent proceedings, 1 M. & S. 436.
Adjourned Sittings at Guildhall. Friday, Feb. 25, 1814. ditcham v. bond. [Subsequent proceedings, 1 M. & S. 436.] (To trespass for breaking and entering the plaintiffs house, and making a noise and daturbance therein, the defendant pleaded a licence, to which the plaintiff replied de injuria. Held, that the plea was supported by evidence that the plaintiff kept a billiard table in the house at which all persons were usually permitted by him to play at regulated prices, and that the defendant entered the house for the purpose of going to the billiard room, although while in the house he was guilty of a trespass in assaulting the plaintiff.) Trespass for breaking and entering the plaintiff's dwelling-house, and making a great noise and disturbance therein, &c. and for assaulting and beating him and his servant. [I2i] The defendant pleaded to breaking and entering the house a licence, with other pieas to the rest of the declaration. Replication to all the pleas, de injuna, &c. It appeared that the plaintiff keeps, several billiard tables in his house, at which til persofis may play, paying certain regulated prices by the game or hour. There is no board or sign on the outside of his house, stating that billiard tables are kept there ; but the outer door always remains open, and gentlemen walk upstairs to the billiard rooms, if any happen to be disemgaged, or if not, they wait in a parlour below. On the 18th of May, the defendant entered the house, and insisted on walking up-Btairs to the billiard rooms, although they were all engaged ; struck the plaintiff who wished, to prevent him ; and made a great disturbance in the house for a considerable while after. It was insisted for the defendant, that he was entitled to a verdict on the plea of licence, as the plaintiff must be supposed to have consented to all persons entenng the house for the purpose of playing at billiards. The defendant might have been guilty of some excess ; but that could not be taken advantage of for want of a new assignment. Ott the other aide it was contended...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Wood v Leadbitter
...(4 East, 107), Winter v. Brockwell (8 East, 308), Doe d. # % v. W&wi (11 East, 56), Clifford v. Brandon (2 Camp. 358), Dittham v. J?o// (3 Camp. 524), jTayZev v. loafer.-; (7 Taunt. 374), Jkc v. HagworlUm/hwn (1 B. & Cr. 634; 3 D. & R. 16), Hetolim v. Sfiipjiam (5 B. & C. 222; 7 D. & R. 783......
- Wright v Cedzich
-
Wiley v Boyd
...Pleas. WILEY and BOYD. Green v. Jones 1 Wms, Saul. 300, c. Ditcham v. BondENR 3 Camp. 524. Barnes v. HuntENR 11 East, 451. Hayward v. GrantENR 1 C. & P. 448. Montprivatt v. SmithENR 2 Camp. 175. Smith v. EggingtonENR 7 Ad. & El. 167. Lambert v. HodgsonENR 1 Bing. 317. Bowen v. JenkinENR 6 A......
-
Eager v Grimwood
...the drrect injury, per quod seivrtium amisit, 01 in case for the consequential damage Trespass rs the form usually adopted Dihhamv A'o-rt^ (3 Camp 524), Woodward v IValloii (5 Q B 297) ] It ih a trespass orr the servarrt, ot whrch the master cannot complain, unless it causes him some loss o......