Van Amringe v. Peabody
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts
Trover for 1700 bushels of com and four pipes of brandy. Plea, the general issue. The plaintiff [George O. Van Amringe] who resides in Philadelphia, in the course of the last spring consigned the goods in question, among others, to Messrs. Damon & Co. of Boston for sale. Messrs.
Read the full summary
Trover for 1700 bushels of com and four pipes of brandy. Plea, the general issue. The plaintiff [George O. Van Amringe] who resides in Philadelphia, in the course of the last spring consigned the goods in question, among others, to Messrs. Damon & Co. of Boston for sale. Messrs. Damon & Co. previous to the 11th of June last were indebted to the defendants [Jacob Peabody and-others], who are auctioneers in Boston, in the sum of 1100 dollars, for which they had deposited with the defendants, as collateral security, a note signed by Messrs. Brent and Chapin, and being desirous of getting that…
1Opinion of the Court
STORY, Circuit Justice.
It is extremely difficult to find any foundation in the facts of this cause, on which to raise an argument, that the goods were sold, and not pledged, to the defendants. The whole current of the evidence is decidedly the other way. Then, as to the law, it is quite too late to doubt the doctrine, that a factor has no authority to pledge the goods of his principal for his own debts. If he does pledge them, the principal is entitled to recover them from the person in whose hands they are pledged. Here the goods have been sold, and the proceeds received by the defendants;…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Horr v. BarkerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1858
- Agnew v. JohnsonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1854
- In re KnoxDistrict Court, N.D. New York · 1900