Dodds v. James M. Bd..

• Decision Date: 31 January 1867
• Citation: 43 Ill. 95,1867 WL 4989
• Parties: MATTHEW M. DODDS et al.v.JAMES M. BOARD.
• Court: Illinois Supreme Court

43 Ill. 95

1867 WL 4989 (Ill.)

MATTHEW M. DODDS et al.

v.JAMES M. BOARD.

Supreme Court of Illinois.

January Term, 1867.

WRIT OF ERROR to the Circuit Court of Edgar county; the Hon. JUSTIN HARLAN, Judge, presiding.

This was an action of trespass vi et armis brought by James M. Board, in the Edgar Circuit Court, against Matthew M. Dodds, John J. Logan, Fergus M. Blair and Ephraim S. Wolf.The declaration proceeded for an assault and battery, by illegally arresting plaintiff and falsely imprisoning him.Each of the defendants, except Logan, filed separate pleas of not guilty.Logan filed a plea of justification, which is the fourth in the series, averring that he had been informed that plaintiff was guilty, as an accessory to a larceny which had been recently committed, and that he was idle and associated with persons of bad character, whereby he suspected him of being guilty of the crime, and arrested him, using no more force than was necessary, and took him before an officer for examination on the charge of larceny.

The defendants, except Logan, filed a fifth plea, in which they aver that they believed, and had probable grounds to believe, that plaintiff was guilty of a larceny then recently committed, from his association with persons of bad character, and for that reason procured Logan as a peace officer to arrest him, and have him taken before a proper officer for examination on the charge of larceny.

The sixth plea is by all of the defendants, and avers that plaintiff associated with persons of bad character, who had been guilty of crime, and a larceny had been recently committed, and that plaintiff, with others, were guilty of the crime, and that they procured Logan, who was a peace officer, to arrest him and take him before two justices of the peace for examination on the charge.

Plaintiff demurred to these several special pleas.Afterward plaintiff entered a nolle prosequi as to Wolf.The court at a subsequent term sustained the demurrer to each of these pleas.And defendants failing to further defend, a jury were impanneled, and, after hearing the evidence, assessed plaintiff's damages at $591, for which sum the court rendered judgment, and defendants prosecute this writ of error and complain of the judgment of the court in sustaining the demurrer to the pleas.

Mr. JAMES A. EADS, for the plaintiffs in error.

Mr. CHIEF JUSTICE WALKERdelivered the opinion of the Court:

The assignment of errors questions the decision of the court below in sustaining the demurrer to the fourth, fifth and sixth pleas filed by defendants below.The fourth plea is intended as a plea of justification.It was pleaded alone by Logan.It avers that plaintiff was an idle person, and consorted with persons of known bad character, and that a larceny had been recently committed in the neighborhood, and that he had been informed that plaintiff was accessory to the crime, and that he believed, and had probable cause for believing, that he was guilty, and had therefore arrested him and taken him before two justices of the peace and had him examined on the charge.This plea as a defense is defective in not stating that Logan was a peace officer authorized to make arrests of persons guilty of crime, if intended as a justification by such an officer.If intended as a justification as a private individual, it should, to constitute a bar, have averred the guilt of plaintiff; the demurrer was, therefore, properly sustained to this plea.

The fifth was...