TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Broadwell v. Nixon

Silas Broadwell against George Nixon

Broadwell v. Nixon, 4 N.J.L. 362 (1817)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Supreme Court of New Jersey · State Highest Courts
Decided
February 15, 1817
Judges
Kirkpatrick, Southard
Citations
4 N.J.L. 362
Headnotes
Charge to jury.
Summary
ON CERTIORARI. NIXON sued Broadwell in trespass, for shooting and killing his hog, of the value of 100 dollars. The defendant, as one of his matters of defence, justified killing the hog, under “ An act concerning trespasses by swine,” Pat. 324, (a)and the justice was requested to charge the jury, “ whether, under that statute, swine may lawfully be killed for entering an enclosure, without doing any actual damage.” The evidence presented that question for the consideration of the court and jury; but the justice refused to charge, except merely to read to the jury the first section of the statute; and added, ‘‘ that was the rule they had to observe.” It was assigned for error, by T. Frelinghuysen,■ for the plaintiff, that the justice had refused to charge the jury upon a question of law, fairly raised by the evidence, and upon which the rights of the parties depended.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court — Kirkpatricksouthard

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

Kirkpatrick C. J. and Southard J.

One of the most important duties of the court, is to expound the law to the jury, so as to instruct and guide it. And this duty must in no way be evaded, when the case requires it. (b) 'We think the judgment must be reversed.

Pullen vs. Boney, ante 128. Mills vs. Sleght, 2 South. 566 . Sayres vs. Ward, Pen. *1010. Todd vs. Collins, 1 Hal. 127. Westcott vs. Garrison, 1 Hal. 132. Den, Wintermute vs. Wintermute, 1 Gr. 177 . Youngs vs. Sunderland, 3 Gr. 32 . Linn vs. Ross, 1 Har. 57 . Boylston vs. Valentine, 1 Har. 347 . Marshall vs. Hann, 2 Har. 429 . Berry vs. Williams, 1 Zab. 428. Cole vs. Taylor, 2 Zab. 60. Folly vs. Vantuyl, 4 Hal. 153. Bellis vs. Phillips, 4 Dutch. 125. Allen vs. Wanamaker, 2 Vr. 370 . Davison vs. Schooley, 5 Hal. 145.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1951: 119512026peak 1951 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Gabriel v. Auf Der Heide-Aragona, Inc.82 A.2d 644 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 1951)

Most recent

  1. Gabriel v. Auf Der Heide-Aragona, Inc.82 A.2d 644 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 1951)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 3

DepthCaseCited by
Dieffenderfer v. Fisher, 3 Grant 30 (1814) 5
Disbrow v. Jones, 1 Harr. Ch. 48 (1839) 1
Suydam v. Dequindre, 1 Harr. Ch. 347 (1841) 0

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list