Case ID: tenn_12/html/0305-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Peck, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Poindexter vs. Cherry.
    After a recovery in ejectment, trespass for the mesne profits, and not assumpsit, is the proper action.
    
      Combs, for plaintiff in error.
    
      Campbell, for defendant.
   Peck, J.

delivered the opinion of the court.

This was an action on the case, in assumpsit, for mesne profits.

The plaintiff introduced on the trial the record of a recovery in ejectment, between the same parties, for the land, and on which the profits had issued; and thereupon offered proofs of the value of such profits during the pen-dency of the action of ejectment. The court rejected the evidence.

It was proper to reject this evidence. Trespass for mesne profits was the proper action; and the form of action must not be departed from.

We do not perceive any error in the record.

Judgment affirmed.