Ago v. Canner
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Tort, for the conversion of certain household goods, alleged to be the property of the plaintiff. Trial in the Superior Court, without a jury, before Mason, C. J., who allowed a bill of exceptions, in substance as follows.
Read the full summary
Tort, for the conversion of certain household goods, alleged to be the property of the plaintiff. Trial in the Superior Court, without a jury, before Mason, C. J., who allowed a bill of exceptions, in substance as follows. While the plaintiff was away on a visit, she left the property in question on the premises hired by, her husband, who, being in sole possession, went to the defendant, told him that his wife had been dead for three months, and asked him to sell his household property. Thereupon he took the defendant to the premises, showed him the property, and then sold and delivered it to…
1Opinion of the CourtAllen, J.
The property belonged to the plaintiff. Her title to it was never lost. In this Commonwealth, a husband no longer has a right to make his wife’s personal property his own, by reducing it to his own possession. Her husband’s acts did not deprive her of her title, or of her right to maintain an action to enforce her title. Pub. Sts. c. 147, § 1. McCowan v. Donaldson, 128 Mass. 169. Pacific National Bank v. Windram, 133 *392Mass. 175. Butler v. Ives, 139 Mass. 202. Harmon v. Old Colony Railroad, 165 Mass. 100.
Exceptions overruled, with double costs.
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Pacific National Bank v. WindramMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1882
- Harmon v. Old Colony RailroadMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1896
- Butler v. IvesMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1885
- McCowan v. DonaldsonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1880
3Cited by2 opinions
- McDonald v. Hartford Trust Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1926
- Guiffre v. CarapezzaMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1937