Pinkham v. Appleton
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
On report. This was an action of trover to determine the question of title and ownership in seventy cords of furnace-wood, forty-eight cords of poplar wood, and four and one-half cords of spruce wood, which the defendant took and sold as the property of the company, of which he is the assignee. The defendant was found liable, for the poplar and spruce wood, upon the same state of facts existing in the preceding case, Ballantyne v. Appleton.
Read the full summary
On report. This was an action of trover to determine the question of title and ownership in seventy cords of furnace-wood, forty-eight cords of poplar wood, and four and one-half cords of spruce wood, which the defendant took and sold as the property of the company, of which he is the assignee. The defendant was found liable, for the poplar and spruce wood, upon the same state of facts existing in the preceding case, Ballantyne v. Appleton. It appeared that the plaintiffs, June 26,1886, made another contract with the company to furnish and deliver on its lands, four to five hundred cords of…
1Opinion of the CourtLibbey, J.
The plaintiff’s claim for the poplar and spruce wood falls within the rule declared in Ballantyne v. Appleton, supra.
But we think the dry furnace-wood for which the plaintiffs claim does not. It appears that this wood was hauled and delivered near the furnace of the company, for its accommodation, was surveyed by Richardson, appointed by the company, and sixty-one cords of it used by the company from time to time before its insolvency. True, Richardson was not a duly appointed and sworn surveyor; still we think his survey was with the knowledge of the plaintiffs, and that the wood was…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Freeport Stone Co. v. Carey's Adm'rWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1896