ACTIONS FOR TRESPASS. Important to Settlers,

Waikato Times, Volume XVI, Issue 1399, 21 June 1881, Page 2

ACTIONS FOR TRESPASS. Important to Settlers,

At the E..M. Court, Hamilton, on Wednesday last, the Resident Magistrate gave the following .judgment in the horse trespass , case Crosby v.^Coleman. The action was 'for alleged 'damage to the amount of £5 7s Cd, by two horses belongto defendant, which, ' with others, trespassed on plaintiff's property in the neighbourhood 'of Hokonui. After reviewing the evidence and laying l down what constitutes a trespass, he quoted, authorities to show, that,one or any, or-all of seveial joint wrongdoers may be sued, and every person whd joins in ' a tort' is liable for it, .even for the whole of it. In proof of this, a case arising out of the trespass of the Berkley hounds on a farmer's land was quoted, where Lord Ellenborough held that a, single defendant against whom the action was brought was liable for all the damage occasioned bv hounds, huntsmen, and a vast' concern se of people, directing the jury not to estimate the damage according to the mischief which the defendant had individually ojcabioned by his trespass, but according to the aggregate amount of mischief done by him and his co-trea-passers and the hounds. ( Addison "On Torts," 313-14). Again, he showed it was not at all necessary in an , action ..of trespass for the plaintiff to show he has sustained any special damage, the mere fact of the 1 trespass' entitling hint at any rate to a nominal verdict. The fact of a portion trespasftfng after notice or warning not to do &o will operate to aggravate the offence. r If v however, there are any circumstanced of aggravation, oV the trespass lias been committed afteis notice not trespass, here; exemplary damages may bo given quite boyoud auy real injury that the plxintiff Jus suffered. After reviewing evidence as to ;tbe ownership of the horses, his WoivshiptWent on to say : '' Therefore, if these horses were not actually the defendant's, he became answerable for them by keeping them on his farm, leading the plaintiff to believe they were his dr his sona', who were associated with him, and by exercising the right of ownership over them, and consequently is liable for* damages, but from aii equitable point I think the amount sued for excessive, so give judgment for £3 2s 6d, and costs; £2 15s.