Case ID: njl_3/html/0240-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "By the Court.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

BRITTIN against VAN CAMP.
    ON CERTIORARI.
    To recover appraised damages of cattle, &c. the statute must be pursued.
    The action below, was an action on the case, brought by Van Camp against the plaintiff in certiorari, on the following state of demand, in substance.
    Plaintiff demands as follows, $12 75 cents, being double the amount of damage done in his corn and pasture, appraised by Peter Haughaworst and Peter Case, $6 37¿ cents, being by them appraised.
    The appraisement given in evidence, was for damage done by the cattle and horses of Brittin, in the corn and pasture [*] of Van Camp. Van Camp recovered $6 37 cents.
    It was contended that this was a proceeding under the act respecting swine, to recover damage for trespass done by 'cattle, and horses; that the action should not have been an action on the case, but trespass; and that the appraisement should not have been given in evidence.
   By the Court.

The state of demand goes for double damages, which the plaintiff is not entitled to in case of damage done by horses and cattle; but as only single damages were recovered, it might excite a struggle to get over this defect in the state of [490] demand. But this would not avail. In case of damage done by horses, cattle, and sheep, if the party intends to recover under the act regulating fences, and to give in evidence the appraisement, he must show in his state of demand, that the act has been pursued ; that his fence was lawful; that the horse, &c., got over, crept through, or broke down the fence, and did damage, and that the appraisers were chosen as the act directs. No part of this has been done. The action cannot be supported on this state of demand.

Judgment reversed. 
      
       See Pat. 338, sec. 13. Jtev. L. 391.