Citation. 92 ER 126, Volume 92
Brief Fact Summary. After a free burgess of a corporation was precluded from voting, he brought suit to recover as to the injuries he suffered.
Synopsis of Rule of Law. When the actions of one party hinder the rights of another, that party may be found liable.
Issue. This question presents among the first issues grounded in civil rights.
* The issue of this case is whether one party may recover damages when one of his civil rights is hindered by the action of another.
Held. Chief Justice Holt held that a plaintiff ought to be allowed to recover, because the right to vote is a common law right and thus, an obstruction of that right should give rise to a cause of action.
Dissent. The majority in the Court of King’s Bench actually held that the verdict for the Plaintiff should be reversed.
Discussion. When the actions of one person serve to hinder the rights of another, a cause of action may arise.