Segal v. Horwitz Bros.
Ohio Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the CourtRoss, J.
If goods are sold, by one who knows them to be stolen, to an innocent purchaser, the vendor must be presumed to intend the natural and logical consequences of his own acts, and, in our opinion the arrest, prosecution, indictment, and trial of a vendee in possession of stolen goods under such circumstances is a natural and logical consequence of the sale to such vendee of stolen goods. The fact that the vendor knows the the vendee to be wholly innocent will not prevent prosecution of the vendee. A prosecution by the owner of the goods is a natural r.esult to be anticipated by the vendor of…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Ineos USA L.L.C. v. Furmanite America, Inc.Ohio Court of Appeals · 2014
- Stork v. TownsendDistrict Court, S.D. Ohio · 1940
- Robinson v. Vehicle Acceptance Corp.Ohio Court of Appeals · 2017
- Vivian Doan v. Asbestos Corporation, Ltd., Gaf CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1992