Case Name: PITFORD v. ARMSTRONG
Court: Supreme Court of Ohio
Jurisdiction: Ohio
Decision Date: 1832-09
Citations: 1 Ohio Ch. 94
Docket Number: 
Parties: PITFORD v. ARMSTRONG.
Judges: 
Reporter: Reports of cases at law and in chancery Ohio
Volume: 1
Pages: 94–94

Head Matter:
PITFORD v. ARMSTRONG.
Trespasser — force in defence of possession — may take possession from wrong doer.
A man in possession of a house may assault and beat off any one wrongfully forcing his way I into it.
jlf he go beyond defence, and use force to obtain possession, or for revenge or punishment of j the aggressor, he is a" trespasser.
jThe owner of land may take the possession frgm a wrong doer, and hold it, but is liable if ’I he break the peace or use force.
- Trespass, quare clausum fregit, assault, &c. Plea, 1. Not guilty. 2. That the act was done in defence of the possession of defendant’s house.

Opinion:
By the Court,
to the jury. A man in the actual possession of a house, may defend his possession against any one who would force his way into it; but if he_have possession wrongfully, the holder of the legal right may take possession, if he can do so without a breach of the peace, and hold it. The act done to constitute a valid justification to the defendant, must have been done in the necessary defence of his property, against the aggression of the plaintiff, not to regain possession, nor for revenge or punishment for an injury. If the defendant has gone beyond protection, he is a trespasser.
Verdict for the plaintiff, and judgment.