Case ID: del-cas_1/html/0219-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

JOHN FISHER v. WILLIAM HUSBAND.
    Court of Common Pleas. Sussex.
    April, 1799.
    
      Wilson's Red Book, 232.
    
    
      Bayard and Wilson for defendant. Hail, Vining and Bidgely for plaintiff.
   Defendant urged that there was a tenancy in common of the fence, and by 1 Esp.NJP. 411 trespass will not lie. Plaintiffs relied on 4 Com.Dig. 75, [title] “Estates,” sections K and J, trespass will lie for removing boundaries.

Note. Though plaintiff prevailed, the point was not well examined, vide Co.Litt. 200 a, b. Trespass will lie for actual ouster, but not reception of profits. Trespass will lie for the destruction of the thing, but not for taking what may be retaken, etc.