Shoecraft v. Bailey
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from Clinton District Court. The petition charges, that the defendant was a hotel keeper, and that the plaintiff, who was his guest, delivered to him, for safe-keeping, his pocket-book containing $136, which, through carelessness of defendant, was lost. The answer of the defendant is a general denial of the allegations of the petition. Trial by the court without a jury. Judgment for plaintiff in the sum of $136. Defendant appeals.
1Opinion of the CourtBeck, J.
l. innkeeper: bl?ieen°guest and boarder. I. The appellant contends that the evidence discloses the fact to be, that the plaintiff was a hoarder, anc^ not a guest, at his inri, and that therefore he is not liable as charged in the petition,
The evidence tends to prove that plaintiff, who was a lumberman, doing business upon the river, came to defendant’s hotel, and, after remaining two or three days, informed defendant that he would be there frequently during the summer, and desired some deduction in the regular charge of the hotel. The defendant agreed to keep him for $1 per day, the regular…
2Cited by9 opinions
- Langford v. RogersMichigan Supreme Court · 1936
- Meacham v. GallowayTennessee Supreme Court · 1899
- State v. JohnsonWashington Supreme Court · 1892
- Metzger v. SchnabelAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1898
- Pollock v. LandisSupreme Court of Iowa · 1873
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.