Burnham v. Fisher
Supreme Court of Vermont
Assumpsit for money had and received. The action was brought to recover money, which the defendant had won from one William Decker, a clerk of the plaintiff. Plea, general issue, and trial by jury.
Read the full summary
Assumpsit for money had and received. The action was brought to recover money, which the defendant had won from one William Decker, a clerk of the plaintiff. Plea, general issue, and trial by jury. On trial, the plaintiff proved, that the said William Decker was clerk in his hat and cap store, at St. Johnsbury, and as such clerk, had power to purchase goods, borrow money, and execute notes in the plaintiff’s name ; and that said Decker had executed notes in the plaintiff’s name ; but that said Decker’s business was to sell goods, which the plaintiff purchased and forwarded to his store at St.…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Bennett J.
Though the plaintiff’s clerk was clothed with extensive powers in regard to the management of his principal’s business; yet there is no reason to suppose, (notwithstanding what Was said in argument,) that the plaintiff was in any way privy to the gambling between his clerk and the defendant; and the question is, can the plaintiff follow the money, lost by the clerk, into the hands of this defendant ? The plaintiff’s money was wrongfully taken by the clerk, and passed into the hands of this defendant, without consideration.
The gambling…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Ervin v. State ex rel. WalleyIndiana Supreme Court · 1897
- Simpson v. BrooksSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1945
- Jenks v. RichardsonU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Northern Ohio · 1895
- Harlan v. Capital Investment Co., Court of Common Pleas of Ohio, Hamilton County1911
- Thompson v. HyndsUtah Supreme Court · 1897