La Place v. Aupoix
New York Supreme Court
This was an action of trover, for a quantity of indigo.' Plea not guilty. The cause was tried at the last circuit before Mr. Chief Justice Lansing. The plaintiff gave in-evidence a written note, without date, from the defendant to the plaintiff, in the words following: ■ . “ Sir and Friend, “ You may rely on my diligence to make the most of your .indigo, of which you have a cask and six barrels and a half, weighing nett 1373 pounds.
Read the full summary
This was an action of trover, for a quantity of indigo.' Plea not guilty. The cause was tried at the last circuit before Mr. Chief Justice Lansing. The plaintiff gave in-evidence a written note, without date, from the defendant to the plaintiff, in the words following: ■ . “ Sir and Friend, “ You may rely on my diligence to make the most of your .indigo, of which you have a cask and six barrels and a half, weighing nett 1373 pounds. I will hold the. proceeds- to your .orders, when collected.” A witness deposed, that he was present at a conversation between the plaintiff and the defendant,…
1Per curiam
The defendant in this case admitted that he had the goods in question, and that he' had lost them. This is sufficient evidence of a conversion; it would have •been idle to make a formal demand of goods, after the defendant had declared that they were lost. Besides, the plaintiff •demanded payment and satisfaction generally, and that was sufficient. [Thompson v. Shirley & Body. 1 Esp. Cases, 31. 4 Term Rep. 260. 1 Burr. 393.](a)
Rule refused.
Accidental loss of goods by a carrier, is not a conversion. 4 Phil. Ev. Cow. & Hill’s ed. 925, Ross v. Johnson, 5 Burr. 2825. Kirkman v. Hargreaves, 1…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Everett v. CoffinNew York Supreme Court · 1831
- Bonaparte v. ClagettCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1893
- Milligan v. Brooklyn Warehouse & Storage Co.New York Supreme Court · 1901
- Jamison v. HendricksIndiana Supreme Court · 1827
- Barber v. AndersonCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1830