Home Winter Circuit
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 12 December 1832 |
| Date | 12 December 1832 |
| Court | High Court |
English Reports Citation: 172 E.R. 1031
IN THE COURTS OF KING'S BENCH, COMMON PLEAS AND EXCHEQUER
Dec 13tfe, 1832. goodman i . taylor. (In an action of trespass for injury done to a horse by a pony and chaise running against it, it was sworn, on the part of the defendant, that his wife was holding the pony by the bridle, and a showman came by and frightened the pony, who ran off with the chaise .-Held, that, if true, this was a good defence on a plea of not guilty.) Trespass for an injury to the plaintiff's horse by a pony and chaise belonging to the defendant. Plea-Not guilty. Two witnesses for the plaintiff swore, that for half an hour before the accident they saw the pony and chaise standing in the street without any person to take care of them, and also that they afterwards saw the pony running away with the chaise, and were present when it ran against the plaintiff's horse, but they did not know the cause of the pony's starting. On the part of the defendant, witnesses were called who said that the defendant's wife stood by the head of the pooy, holding it by the rein, when a Punch and Judy show coming by frightened the pony, and he ran away, and almost pulled the defendant's wife down while she tried to hold him in, and she was at length obliged to let go the rein. Chambers, for the defendant, contended, that, under these circumstances, the defendant was entitled to the verdict Comya, ter the plaintiff, only observed on the contradictory evidence, and submitted that the plaintiff's witnesses were most entitled to credit Denm*n, G. J., in summing up (t/iter alia), said-If [411] the facts are true as suggested for the defeace, I very much think you would be disposed to consider this as am inevitable accident, one which the defendant could not prevent. Indeed the learned counsel for the plaintiff seems to admit that, for he does not contend that the defendant's wife was not a proper person to have the care of the pony, but he puts the case up the contradiction between the testimony of the witnesses His lordship read the evidence, and left the case to the jury, who found a- away with him, and that the plaintiff and others were called to to go out of the way, and did not, and the hoise ran upon the plamtiff against his will, &c ; the plaintiff demurred, and had judgment ò not but if the defendant had pleaded not guilty this matter might have acquitted him upon evidence ; but the reason of the judgment was because the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
R v Bowden
...on the 5th day of January, 5 Viet , " in the dwelling-house of him the said Jamet-. Bowden, there (a) See the case ot Rex v. Penson, 5 C. & P. 412 1 OAE. & K. 148. STANTON V. PATON 753 situate," a number of articles enumerated in the indictment, above the value of £5, the property of Harris......
-
The Queen v Griffin
...Cas. 32. Reg. v. Savage 13 Cox C. C. 178. The Queen v. Allen L. R. 1 Cr. Cas. Res. 368. Reg. v. BrawnENR 1 C. & K. 144. Reg. v. PensonENR 5 C. & P. 412. Reg. v. MillisENR 10 Cl. & Fin. 534. The King v. The Inhabitants of BramptonENR 10 East, 282, 289. The Queen v. Allen L. R. 1 Cr. Cas. R. ......
-
THE QUEEN v THOMAS FANNING. [Crown Cases Reserved.]
...14 Ir. Com. Law Rep. 188. Brawn's case 5 Ir. Law Rep. 549. Regina v. BurkeENR 1 Cox C. C. 34, and 1 C. & K. 144. Regina v. PensonENR 5 C. & P. 412. Regina v. PensonENR 5 C. & P. 412. Regina v. AllisonENR Also reported in R. & R. 109. M'Inerney's case Ir. Cir. R. 270. Graham's case 2 Lewin's......