Wilson v. Kuykendall
Wilson v. Kuykendall
Opinion of the Court
delivered the opinion of the court.
The appellees sued the appellants for trespass, and recovered a judgment of one hundred dollars. The appellants appeáled from said judgment. The suit originated from the act of'the appellants in going upon the
Under the law a party has not the right to invade the premises of another and take from the possession of the other party by force or against the will of the party in possession any property, even though he may have title thereto. He must in such case resort to court to obtain possession if the party in possession refuses on demand to deliver the property. There were no errors in the instructions or in the rulings of the court, and the jury were the judges of the amount of damages, and the judgment is accordingly affirmed.
Affirmed. •
Reference
- Cited By
- 8 cases
- Status
- Published
- Syllabus
- 1. Tbespass. Elements of damages. Talcing property without legal process. Where appellant went upon the premises of appellee over his protest and without having any writ or warrant of any kind from any officer of the law, took possession of a mule he had sold on a conditional contract and thereby frightened appellee’s wife, and putting him to expenses in recovering the property, the ■ jury may consider not only the value of the mule, but all other circumstances in fixing the damage. 2. Same. Under the law a party has not the right to invade the premises of another and take from the possession of the other party by force against the will of the party in possession any property, even though he may have title thereto. He must in such case resort to the courts to obtain possession, if the party in possession refuses on demand to deliver the property.