In ravishment of ward, the defendant pleads not guilty, the jury finds the defendant guilty, but they find moreover, that pending the writ, the plaintiff seised the Ward ; the plaintiff has judgment, this judgment was affirmed in error. The defendant might have pleaded, that the plaintiff seised the ward pending the writ ; and this would have abated the writ ; for the words of the writ or ravishment are, that the sheriff shall seise the ward ad reddendum cui reddi debit. In this case the jury found the ravishment, which is the issue ; the finding of the seizure is superfluous, and out of the issue. The law is the same in the like case in waste, and ejectment.
Superflua non nocent.
Citations:
[1220] EngR 106, (1220-1623) Jenk 183, (1220) 145 ER 122 (C)
Links:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Children
Updated: 08 May 2022; Ref: scu.461018