McDaniels v. Robinson
Supreme Court of Vermont
Assumpsit for $4,000, being two hundred double eagles, left with the defendant, as an inn-keeper. Plea, the general issue j trial by jury, December Term, 1855, — Peck, J., presiding, The plaintiff gave evidence tending to prove that from a, time anterior to the 26th of February, 1851, until and after the 6th of March following, the defendant was keeping an inn, in Bennington; and that the plaintiff, on said first mentioned day, became a guest at said inn, and so continued…
Read the full summary
Assumpsit for $4,000, being two hundred double eagles, left with the defendant, as an inn-keeper. Plea, the general issue j trial by jury, December Term, 1855, — Peck, J., presiding, The plaintiff gave evidence tending to prove that from a, time anterior to the 26th of February, 1851, until and after the 6th of March following, the defendant was keeping an inn, in Bennington; and that the plaintiff, on said first mentioned day, became a guest at said inn, and so continued until the said 6th of March, at night; and tljat on the 5th of March, about sunset, he delivered to the. defendant, within…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered, at the circuit session in June, by
Bennett, J.
The principal question raised on this bill of exceptions is, was the money in the custody of the defendant, as inn*' keeper, at the ‘time of its loss ? We are to take it for granted that the jury have found that the plaintiff had intentionally determined his own stay at the defendant’s inn immediately after the money was left with him, and before its loss, not intending again to return ‘to the inn as a guest, and that the delivery of the gold to the defendant was a distinct transaction, disconnected in…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- McDonald v. EdgertonNew York Supreme Court · 1849
3Cited by2 opinions
- Brewer v. CaswellSupreme Court of Georgia · 1909
- Oxford Hotel Co. v. LindSupreme Court of Colorado · 1909