
    OCTOBER TERM, 1790.
    Nicholas Tschudy against State of Maryland.
    THIS was a removal from Baltimore county court, by a writ of certiorari, issued on the part of the state. It was an action of assumpsit for eight months’ rent of a house, rented by the quarter-master, and occupied by the officers of the French artillery. The process was a summons directed to the sheriff of Baltimore county, commanding him to summons Luther Martin, Esq. the attorney-general of the state of Maryland, to be and appear in his proper person, before, &c. on, &c. then and there to defend a claim on behalf of the state of Maryland, at the suit of a certain Nicholas Tschudy, for the sum of 66h 13s. 4d. current money, agreeably to an act of assembly, passed in the year 1786, (c. 53.) At May term, 1790, verdict was given for the state. The plaintiff moved for a new trial and filed the following reasons, viz,
    
      1. That this is an action on the case for the use-and oecupation of a house, and the defendant cannot say that the plaintiff has no title in the said premises.
    2. That on the above action the title of the plaintiff _ 1 cannot be controverted, and the defendant is estopped to say that the plaintiff has no title in the premises for the time he enjoyed them,
    3. That the court having directed the jury “ that by the contract from the plaintiff to Joseph Lemaim, it appeared that the title of the premises was not in the plaintiff, but in the said Lemaim during the time that the said premises was used and occupied by the defendant; and, as such, that the plaintiff could not recover on the present action,” was a misdirection of the court to the jury, and for the reasons aforesaid, the plaintiff is entitled to a new-trial.
    
      David PL Mechen, attorney for the plaintiff.
   The Court

overruled the reasons, and gave judgment on the verdict for the state.  