Dominus R v Opie and Dodge, &
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 01 January 1845 |
| Date | 01 January 1845 |
| Court | Court of the King's Bench |
English Reports Citation: 85 E.R. 418
COURT OF KING'S BENCH
[300] 46. dominus rex versus opie and dodge, &o. Trin. 21 of King Charles the Second, among the Indictments, No. 19, Cornwall, to wit.-Be it remembered, that Sir Thomas Fanshaw, Knight, Coroner and Attorney of our lord the King, in the Court of our said lord the King, before the King himself, who prosecutes for our said lord the King in this behalf, in his own proper person comes here into the Court of our said lord the King, before the King himself, at Westminster, on Friday next after the morrow of the Holy Trinity in this same term, and for our said lord the King, gives the Court here to understand and be informed, that at the Assizes holden for the said county of Cornwall, at Launceston in the said county, on Wednesday the 17th day of March, in. the 21st year of the reign of our Lord Charles the Second, by the grace of God, of England, Scotland, France, and Ireland, King, defender of the faith, &c. before Sir John Vaughan, Knight, Chief Justice of our said lord the King of the Bench, and Sir John Archer, Knight, one of the justices of our said lord the King of the Bench, justices awns.Human. trin. 22 cab. u. regis 419 of the same lord the King assigned to take Assizea in the said county, a certain issue in a plea of trespass upon the case between Edward Hoblin, gent, plaintiff, and Richard Opie, gent, defendant, was tried by a jury of the country. And that the said Richard Opie, of St. Breock, near Wadebridge, in the said county, gentleman, Peter Dingle, of St. Mayha, in the said county, yeoman, Stephen Trehane, late of Launceston, in the said county, yeoman, and Edward Dodge, late of Launceaton, in the said county, yeoman, on the 17th day of March, in the said 21at year of the reign of our said lord the now King, at Launceston aforesaid, in the county aforesaid, before the said trial, contrived, conspired, and among themselves unlawfully agreed, by rewards and other ways and means, unlawfully to procure a verdict to be given for the defendant: and to perform their said most wicked intentions, contrivances...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Greene v Jones
...above newly assigned, says nothing in bar or preclusion of the said trespasses above newly assigned, where- 414 GREENE V.JONES 1 WMS. SAUND. 300. Trespass, 422. 6 Mod. 119.(m) Where the plaintiff and defendant agree in the place, the plaintiff cannot new assign. But if the defendant, profes......
-
Dean v Taylor
...evidence (a) The defendant is entitled to the verdict, for the plaintiff relied solely upon the excess, and he has not replied it. In 1 Wms Saund 300 h., note (?), it is laid down "that if the circum-[70]-stanees are such that the excess does not make the defendant a trespasser ab mitio, th......