case FINEUX against Hovenden see Harrop v Hirst lr ex nuisance consent of  party cure a erroneous visne   light a note Vaugh stram a action for a  nuisance will not lie except the plaintiff have a particular right or suffer a  special injury ante   light   f n b     Inst Carth sand Mod ld ray salk hawk  Cowp action on the case whereas there have be a way within the city of  Canterbury croak Elizabeth er p lead from saint Peter street unto a street  call Rushmarket and that all the inhabitant of the city have use time whereof  c to pass that way and that the plaintiff be a inhabitant there that the  defendant have make a ditch and erect a pale cross that way whereby he have  lose his passage c the defendant plead not guilty and by a visne award of W in  the county of ken by assent of the party in regard the cause concern all the  inhabitant of Canterbury it be find for the plaintiff and now move in arrest  of judgement that it be a mistrial first because it ought to have be by a v  isne of Canterbury vide Edward pl dyer Butthe court hold it to he well enough  because it be by assent of the party which be enter upon record el  consevsusiollit wandering vide Edward pl assize dyer and Fenner cite Lord  Cromwell case to he adjudge that a issue try by another jury than it ought to  he yet be by assent be well enough second it be move by coke attorneygeneral  that this action lie not for a private person because it be a common nuisance  and be punishable in a court leet only unless he can show some special  prejudice as Henry pl be and so it be adjudge in this court in sergeant  Hendlows v Kemp that he may maintain a action upon some special prejudice and  at saint Alban term in William v John a it be adjudge that where a chapel be  within a manor and the parson of the adjoin church use to read divine service  every Sunday for the lord and his tenant in the say chapel and for that the  parson have fail therein the lord bring a action upon the case and adjudge  that it lie not for so every one of the tenant may bring the like action which  will he inconvenient that he shall he liable to all their action but he ought  to be punish by the ordinary in this case but peradventure where there be not  any other remedy to he have than by action there every one may have his action  who be grieve and therefore in Westbury v Powel where the inhabitant of  Southwark have a common wateringplace and the defendant have stop it and the  plaintiff be a inhabitant there bring his action upon the case it be adjudge  maintainable but it be here punishable in the leet wherefore c and of that  opinion be Popham gawdy and Fenner that without a special grief show by the  plaintiff the action lie not but Clench contra for the stop of itself be a  special prejudice to the plaintiff that he can go that way wherefore it be  reason he shall maintain the action say adjournatur