Derrick v. Baker
Supreme Court of Alabama
Error to Madison Circuit court. Assumpsit, before Lane, J. Plaintiff’s intestate, being about to take a journey to foreign parts, left a sum of money with defendant, to be distributed among his relatives, in case he never returned. The intestate died on the journey, and the money not being appropriated by defendant, according to the intention of the intestate, this action was brought to recover it.
Read the full summary
Error to Madison Circuit court. Assumpsit, before Lane, J. Plaintiff’s intestate, being about to take a journey to foreign parts, left a sum of money with defendant, to be distributed among his relatives, in case he never returned. The intestate died on the journey, and the money not being appropriated by defendant, according to the intention of the intestate, this action was brought to recover it. Defendant requested the court to charge the jury, that if they believed the money was left with defendant as alleged, yet no action could be sustained for its recovery, unless after demand made, —…
1Opinion of the CourtGoldtewaite, J.
In the consideration of this case, *363we are led necessarily into an enquiry into the precise character of the bailment, and of the duties to be performed by the bailee. If the character of the bailment can be determined, and the duties of the bailee ascertained, the solution of the questions presented by the bill of exceptions will be without difficulty.
It is sufficiently clear from the evidence, that if the bailor lived, the money was to be returned to him, and was to be distributed only in the event of his death. The expression of this wish, or rather the direction given by the bailor,…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Wright v. PaineSupreme Court of Alabama · 1878