Farley v. Lovell
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Tort by Alfred M. Farley, George H. Hill and William A. Quinn for the conversion by the defendant of five cases of glass, the property of the plaintiffs ; a count in contract for goods sold and delivered, alleged to be for the same cause of aclion, was added.
Read the full summary
Tort by Alfred M. Farley, George H. Hill and William A. Quinn for the conversion by the defendant of five cases of glass, the property of the plaintiffs ; a count in contract for goods sold and delivered, alleged to be for the same cause of aclion, was added. In the answer to the first count the defendant denied the conversion, and in the answer to the second count left proof of the sale and delivery to the plaintiffs, and alleged that if the goods had been sold and delivered to him, they had been fully paid for. At the trial in the superior court, before Dewey, J., it appeared that the…
1Opinion of the CourtMorton, J.
The appropriation by Quinn of the partnership property to the payment of his private debts was a fraud upon the firm for which the laws furnish a remedy to the defrauded partners. The only question in this case is whether they have adopted the proper remedy. We are of opinion that the case of Homer v. Wood, 11 Cush. 62, is decisive of this question. The principles upon which that decision is founded, and the reasoning by which the conclusion is reached, are equally applicable to the case at bar. The difficulty in maintaining the action in that case, which was found to be insuperable, was,…
2Cited by14 opinions
- Kilgore v. BruceMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1896
- Locke v. LewisMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1878
- Shapira v. BudishMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1931
- Harris v. Water & Light Co.Tennessee Supreme Court · 1901
- Brickett v. DownsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1895
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.