Plaintiff brought trespass. in C. B. for taking an excessive distress?, and recovered; but on error in B. R. the judgment was reversed, on the ground that trespass would not lie; the entry and distress being lawful, in part, for the rent due, and they è being one act; and that it was not like the case, were was a subsequent abuse of the distress.

The proper remedy for an excessive distress is, an action on the cas., founded on the statute of Marlbridge, 52 H. 3. c. 4. w!.ich provides, “ that distresses shall be reasonable, “ and that persons taking unreasonable distresses shall be grievously amerced for the excess of such distresses." But this action cannot be maintained after a judgment recovered in replevin'. q Lyon v. Moody, Fitzg. 85. 2 Str. r Philips v. Berryman, Triu. 23 G. 8.

B. R. M$.

851. S. C.

tress;" but it was said, that there was one excepted case*, namely, where gold or silver was to an excess, apparent on the face of it; as where six ounces of gold and 100 ounces of silver were taken for 6s. and 8d.; but that proceeds on the ground, that gold and silver are of apertain and known value, and the measure of the value of other things.

* Moir y. Munday, B. R. H. 28 G. 2. cited in 1 Burr. 592. and by Kenyon C. J.

in Crowther v. Ramsbottom, 7 T.R. 658.


Old Budwell Court, Londono


[ocr errors][ocr errors]
« ForrigeFortsett »