Maxwell v. Eason
Supreme Court of Alabama
This was an action of assumpsit, brought by the plaintiff in error, who was also plaintiff below in the County-Court of Madison county, against Eason, to recover the value of a parcel of cotton delivered by the former to the latter as owner of a cotton gin, and which was destroyed by fire. There was at February term. (827, a vei diet for the defendant.
Read the full summary
This was an action of assumpsit, brought by the plaintiff in error, who was also plaintiff below in the County-Court of Madison county, against Eason, to recover the value of a parcel of cotton delivered by the former to the latter as owner of a cotton gin, and which was destroyed by fire. There was at February term. (827, a vei diet for the defendant. The facts on which ;he decision of this Court was made, appear in the following opinion of a majority of the Court, delivered cited Jones on Bailment; 2 Starkié 973; 1 Washington 10; 1 Call 147; 5 Munford 483; 2 Caines 32.
1Opinion of the Court
By JUDGE SAFFOLD.
The declaration charges, that the cotton was delivered to the defendant in the way of his trade or employment as gin holder, and under a contract that he should gin and bale the same for a reasonable price or reward, and that *515lie should take due and proper care of the same, until it should be redelivered to the plaintiff. But that by means of the negligence and improper conduct of the defendant, the cotton was wholly lost.
On the trial below, as shewn by the record, it was proved that lite defendant’s gin house, containing the plaintiff’s cotton, as also some of his own, was…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Branch v. BurnleyCourt of Appeals of Virginia · 1797
- Gracie v. BowneNew York Supreme Court · 1804
3Cited by2 opinions
- Walker v. StephensSupreme Court of Alabama · 1930
- McKernan v. Detroit Citizens' Street-Railway Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1904