Ogden v. Claycomb

Decision Date30 September 1869
Citation52 Ill. 365,1869 WL 5448
PartiesRUFUS OGDENv.GEORGE CLAYCOMB.
CourtIllinois Supreme Court

OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE

APPEAL from the Circuit Court of Warren county; the Hon. ARTHUR A. SMITH, Judge, presiding.

The opinion states the case.

Messrs. STEWART & PHELPS, for the appellant.

Messrs. KIRKPATRICK & GLENN, for the appellee.

Mr. JUSTICE LAWRENCE delivered the opinion of the Court:

This was an action for assault and battery, in which the jury found for the defendant. The verdict was against the evidence, and there was error in the instructions for the defendant. From the first instruction the jury would understand, if the plaintiff advanced upon the defendant in a threatening manner, for the purpose of fighting, and a fight followed, the plaintiff could not recover, even though the defendant had far exceeded the just bounds of self-defense, and inflicted an inhuman beating, provided he desisted as soon as the plaintiff asked him to do so. The rule is, on the contrary, that no more violence can be used than a reasonable man would, under the circumstances, regard necessary to his defense. If he strikes a blow not necessary to his defense, or after all danger is past, or by way of revenge, he is guilty of an assault and battery. The third instruction tells the jury, among other things, that the plaintiff, in order to recover, should have been guilty of no provocation. This is error. It is wholly immaterial what language he may have used, so far as the right to maintain an action is concerned, and even if he went beyond words, and committed a technical assault, the acts of the defendant must still be limited to a reasonable self-defense. All the instructions for the defendant are pervaded to a greater or less degree by these errors, and should have been refused. The judgment must be reversed and the cause remanded.

Judgment reversed.

To continue reading

Request your trial
7 cases
  • Railway Co. v. Depascale
    • United States
    • Ohio Supreme Court
    • June 7, 1904
    ... ... v ... Berger, 64 Ark. 613; Fenelon v. Butts, 53 Wis. 344; Corcoran ... v. Harran, 55 Wis. 120; Donnelly v. Harris et al., 41 Ill ... 126; Ogden v. Claycomb, 52 Ill. 365; Gizler v. Witzel, 82 ... Ill. 322; Norris v. Casel, 90 Ind. 143; Johnson v. McKee, 27 ... Mich. 471; Jacobs et al. v ... ...
  • Carr v. Neva
    • United States
    • North Dakota Supreme Court
    • September 26, 1917
    ...Curtis v. Carson, 2 N.H. 539; Philbrick v. Foster, 4 Ind. 442; Bartlett v. Churchill, 24 Vt. 218; Brown v. Gordon, 1 Gray, 182; Ogden v. Claycomb, 52 Ill. 365; Riddle State, 49 Ala. 389; Williams v. State, 44 Ala. 41, and cases cited; Carpenter v. Manhattan L. Ins. Co., 93 N.Y. 556; Murphy ......
  • Haman v. The Omaha Horse Ry. Co
    • United States
    • Nebraska Supreme Court
    • June 30, 1892
    ... ... All ... the authorities agree that words of provocation alone will ... not justify an assault. (Sorgenfrei v. Schroeder, ... 75 Ill. 397; Ogden v. Claycomb, 52 Ill. 365; ... Donnelly v. Harris, 41 Ill. 126; State v ... Griffin, 87 Mo. 608; Collins v. Todd, 17 Mo ... 537; State v. Wood, 1 ... ...
  • Winn v. Inman
    • United States
    • United States Appellate Court of Illinois
    • November 23, 1983
    ... ... Hulse v. Tollman, 49 Ill.App. 490. In Ogden v. Claycomb, 52 Ill. 365, a suit arising out of an assault and battery, the rule is stated in the following language: 'No more violence can be used ... ...
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT