Nature of the Case
To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.
Facts
Shepherd (D) threw a lighted squib from the street into a market-house, where many people were assembled. It was tossed about the house in an effort to remove until it finally exploded and took out one of Scott's (P) eyes. P sued D in trespass vi et armis. D pleaded that the action should have been dismissed; it should have been brought on the case, not trespass. The jury found for P and D appealed. P has a choice between suing trespass vi et armis (consequential or indirect harm) and trespass on the case (direct harm). D argued that he had not caused the injury as he had not actually thrown the squib in P’s face.
Holding and Decision
To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.
Legal Analysis
To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.
© 2007-2024 ABN Study Partner.
© 2024 Casebriefsco.com. All Rights Reserved.