Godwin v. Taenzer
Tennessee Supreme Court
PROM SHELBY. Appeal from the Chancery Court of Sbelby County. —F. H. Heiskell, Chancellor.
1Opinion of the CourtChief Justice Beard
The question of law raised on the record in this case is: What is the measure of recovery to which the complainant, from whose land timber has been feloniously taken, is entitled as against the defendants, who innocently purchased the same from the felon and as innocently converted it to their own use? The contention of the defendants is that, having bought and appropriated the timber in good faith and without any knowledge of the true ownership, they should be charged the value of the timber at the place where the trees *103were felled from which it was eut, and not its market value at the point…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Wooden-Ware Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1882
- Silsbury & Calkins v. McCoon & ShermanNew York Court of Appeals · 1850
- Dougherty v. ChesnuttTennessee Supreme Court · 1887
- Nesbitt v. St. Paul Lumber Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1875
- Parker v. Waycross & Florida RailroadSupreme Court of Georgia · 1889
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Stevenson v. J.C. Bradford & Co. (In re Cannon)Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2002
- Hessen v. Iowa Automobile Mutual InsuranceSupreme Court of Iowa · 1922
- Masonite Corp. v. WilliamsonMississippi Supreme Court · 1981
- United Brake Systems, Inc. v. American Environmental Protection, Inc.Court of Appeals of Tennessee · 1997
- Frankfort Land Co. v. HughettTennessee Supreme Court · 1916
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.