Ingersoll v. Emmerson
Indiana Supreme Court
APPEAL from the Al/cc Circuit Court. Replevin, by the appellants against the appellee, for a canal boat. Pleas, 1st. non cry/I; 2d. non th'tinct; 3d. property in the defbndant 4th, 5th, and 6th. property in other persons. There was a trial by jury which resulted in a verdict for the defendant. Motion for a new trial overruled and judgment Jr idoiito.
Read the full summary
APPEAL from the Al/cc Circuit Court. Replevin, by the appellants against the appellee, for a canal boat. Pleas, 1st. non cry/I; 2d. non th'tinct; 3d. property in the defbndant 4th, 5th, and 6th. property in other persons. There was a trial by jury which resulted in a verdict for the defendant. Motion for a new trial overruled and judgment Jr idoiito. It appeared by the ci idcnce that in Dcccrnhcr, 1812, John I. Iio/7i~ Jay 4~ Co., being the on ners of said hoot, then l~ ing in the harbor of G/c eclunil, Ohio, mortgaged it to Jiipcisol/ 4~ Bouck, to secure the payment of certain drafts tlraivn…
1Opinion of the Court
Snmr, .1.-
"Ilaiing shown api-/inc /heia right to the possession of the boat, the \ erdiet should have been br the p]aint.ifks. unless the *78defendant proved that he had a better title. This he, certainly, failed to do. Gideon Holliday appeal’s to have come into the possession of the boat through the plaintiffs as their bailee. As such he had no authority to sell and a title derived through him was wholly worthless. If a bailee of goods for a particular purpose, transfers them In contravention of such purpose, even although it be to a bona fide vendee without notice, the latter cannot resist the…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Kitchell v. VanadarIndiana Supreme Court · 1825