Goodman v Aylin
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 01 January 1792 |
| Date | 01 January 1792 |
| Court | Court of the King's Bench |
English Reports Citation: 80 E.R. 99
IN THE COURT OF KING'S BENCH
goodman versus aylin. hill. 5 jac. eot. 834. 1 Brownl. 213. Moore 870. Hob. 108. Eaym. 254. 5 Com. Dig. 334. 4 Bac. Abr. 393. Doug. 396. 747. Trespass. Trespass, that the defendant 8 Febr' 4 Jac. apud P. domum of the plaintiff broke, and one brasse-chasser of the plaintiff's, value 20s. took and carried away, &c. The 100 MICH. 6 JAC, B. R. YELVERTON, 149. defendant pleaded, that the house is parcel of an half yard-land in P. and that it was held of H. Earl of Northumberland, as of his manor of VV. by homage, fealty, escuage incertain, suit of court, inclosing of the park pale, and the rent of a pound of cumin, and for the cumin arrear for three years, and the homage and fealty of Thomas Peller tenant inde, the defendant, as servant to the earl, and by his command justified the entry and taking, &c. The plaintiff replied, that it was held of ft. Stanley as of his manor of Lee, &c. absque hoc, that it was held of the earl modo & forma ; and upon that they were at issue: and the jury found that it was held of the earl as of his manor of P. by homage, fealty, inclosing of the park, rent of a pound of cumin, & non aliter, and si videbitur Curiie, that it is not held modo & fwma, they find for the plaintiff, &c. And it was adjudged for the defendant; for altho' the verdict does not agree with the plea in the manner and nature of the tenure, yet it agrees in substance in the point for which the taking was, viz. that the land is held of the earl; and that is sufficient: for there is a difference between replevin and trespass; for in replevin, because the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Potter v North
...which is in the nature of a declaration, must shew a good title in omnibus, and contain sufficient matter to entitle him to a return. Yelv. 148, Goodman v. Ayling. Thus in trespass, if the defendant justify for an amerciament in a court-leet, he must set forth a warrant, for he is a wrong-d......
-
Riccards against Corneforth
...Moor, 281, in the 8th resolution in the case of Battey v. Trevilian. (b) Howell v. Samback, Hob. 133. (c) Brown v. Dunnery, Hob. 208. (d) Yelv. 148. (e) Cro. Eliz. 799. SMOD.SM. MICHAELMAS TEEM, 9 WILL. 3. IN B. E. 709 sufficient if the substance be found, viz. that rent is in arrear, thoug......
-
Goggins v Trench
...413. Porter v. French 9 Ir. Law Rep. 514. Birch v. BellamyENR 12 Mod. 540. Spratt v. MurphyIR 6 Ir. Com. Law Rep. 496. Goodman v. AylingENR Yelv. 148. Mathews v. CareyENR Carth. 74. Crosse v. BilsonENR 6 Mod. 102. Hawkins v. EcklesENR 2 Bos. & Pul. 359, 361. Crosse v. BilsonENR 6 Mod. 102. ......
-
Richards v Cornford
...judgment was reversed, nisi, &c. Mr. Montagu counsel for the avowant cited in this case 11 Co. 45. Moor 281. Hob. 133, 208. T. Jones, 138. Yelv. 148. Cro. Eliz. 799. But afterwards the record in the Common Pleas was amended (for this error proceeded from the mistake of the attorney of the p......