Hobart v. Hagget
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
Trespass, for the alleged taking and converting to his own use by the defendant, an ox, the property of the plaintiff. The general issue was pleaded and joined. “ The defendant proved, that be met the plaintiff in the street, and paid him $25,50 for an ox, which the plaintiff directed him to go and take.
Read the full summary
Trespass, for the alleged taking and converting to his own use by the defendant, an ox, the property of the plaintiff. The general issue was pleaded and joined. “ The defendant proved, that be met the plaintiff in the street, and paid him $25,50 for an ox, which the plaintiff directed him to go and take. That, he went and took an ox out of the plaintiff’s inclosure, supposing it to he the one he had so purchased ; and produced much other evidence, tending to show, that the ox taken, was the one he had bargained for. The plaintiff introduced evidence to show, that there had been a mistake and…
1Opinion of the Court
Parris J.
The ox taken by the defendant was the property of the plaintiff, and although the defendant attempted to prove that he purchased that ox, and consequently had a right to take it, the attempt wholly failed. He may have considered himself as the purchaser, but unless the plaintiff assented to it, no property passed. The assent of both minds was necessary to make the contract. The court below charged- the jury that if they were satisfied there had been an innocent mistake between the parties and that the defendant had supposed he had purchased the ox in question when in fact the…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Guille v. SwanNew York Supreme Court · 1822
- Higginson v. YorkMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1809
3Cited by4 opinions
- Poggi v. ScottCalifornia Supreme Court · 1914
- Massachusetts Bay Insurance v. Ferraiolo Construction Co.Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1990
- Shell Petroleum Corp. v. Liberty Gravel & Sand Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1939
- Miller v. CondonArizona Supreme Court · 1947