{
  "id": 5203993,
  "name": "Asa B. Searles, Plaintiff in Error, v. James Crombie, Defendant in Error",
  "name_abbreviation": "Searles v. Crombie",
  "decision_date": "1862-04",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "396",
  "last_page": "396",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "28 Ill. 396"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill.",
    "id": 8772,
    "name": "Illinois Supreme Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 127,
    "char_count": 1831,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.463,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 1.075618517046311e-07,
      "percentile": 0.5609002687029244
    },
    "sha256": "9c339aacb6dc1edd8da43466d35e16afd1d1b979c30a352d8beff6e8433dbc74",
    "simhash": "1:c2ba7467485e27fd",
    "word_count": 315
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T21:21:34.240099+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Asa B. Searles, Plaintiff in Error, v. James Crombie, Defendant in Error."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Cat\u00f3n, C. J.\nThe qualification which the court gave to the plaintiff\u2019s instructions was not right. The principle of the instructions was, that possession without title is sufficient to maintain trespass, and that if the defendant had taken the \u25a0mare from the plaintiff\u2019s possession, the jury should find the \u25a0defendant guilty ; to which the court added this qualification, \u201c unless the defendant has proved some right to her in himselfj or those who assisted in such taking.\u201d This is not the law. There may be many interests in property which will not justify a trespass by taking it. The right of property may be in one and the right of possession in another. At the very least, the jury should have been told that the defendant, or \u25a0those under whom he acted, should have shown affirmatively that he had a right to the immediate possession, before there \u25a0could be any pretense of a justification for taking the mare from the defendant\u2019s possession.\nThe, judgment is reversed, and the cause remanded.\nJudgment reversed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Cat\u00f3n, C. J."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "W. E. Ives, for Plaintiff in Error.",
      "_B. H. Tbusdell, for Defendant in Error."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Asa B. Searles, Plaintiff in Error, v. James Crombie, Defendant in Error.\nerror to lee.\nIn an action of trespass for taking personal property, proof of right of possession may be sufficient to sustain the action; and although defendant may prove some right to the property in himself or others who assisted in the trespass, it is no justification.\nThe right of property may be in one person, and the right of'possession in another.\nThis was an action of trespass, brought before a justice of the peace to recover damages for the wrongful taking of a mare from the possession of plaintiff in error, and taken by appeal to the Circuit Court of Lee county. There was a trial by jury, and a verdict and judgment for the defendant below.\nW. E. Ives, for Plaintiff in Error.\n_B. H. Tbusdell, for Defendant in Error."
  },
  "file_name": "0396-01",
  "first_page_order": 396,
  "last_page_order": 396
}