The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

Shepherd (D) threw a lighted squib from the street into a market-house, where many people were assembled. It was tossed about the house in an effort to remove until it finally exploded and took out one of Scott's (P) eyes. P sued D in trespass vi et armis. D pleaded that the action should have been dismissed; it should have been brought on the case, not trespass. The jury found for P and D appealed. P has a choice between suing trespass vi et armis (consequential or indirect harm) and trespass on the case (direct harm). D argued that he had not caused the injury as he had not actually thrown the squib in P’s face.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.