Huntington v. Douglass
The Superior Court of New York City
Appeal from a judgment entered on a verdict for the plaintiff. The action was brought by Calvin Huntington against Charles Douglass and Thomas Douglass to recover damages for the conversion of certain goods, alleged in the complaint to have been “ converted ” by the defendants to their own use. The defendants, by their answer, denied the plaintiff’s ownership of the propertythey also denied any conversion thereof by them.
Read the full summary
Appeal from a judgment entered on a verdict for the plaintiff. The action was brought by Calvin Huntington against Charles Douglass and Thomas Douglass to recover damages for the conversion of certain goods, alleged in the complaint to have been “ converted ” by the defendants to their own use. The defendants, by their answer, denied the plaintiff’s ownership of the propertythey also denied any conversion thereof by them. The cause was tried on the 25th of March, 1863, before Mr. Justice White, and a jury. The plaintiff read in evidence an agreement as follows: “ Insured in Market Ins. Co., “…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court.—Monell, J.
It was error to exclude the evidence offered by the defendants, that at the time of the sale, Ames was the owner of the property in question; and that subsequently, and before the demand, he took posession and removed it from the defendants’ premises and control.
The demand and refusal, upon which alone the plaintiff rested as proof of conversion, was prima facie evidence merely, and could be repelled by.proof that a compliance with the demand was impossible (Kelsey v. Griswold, 6 Barb. S. Ct., *390436 ; Hill v. Covell, 1 N. Y. [1 Comst.], 522; Whitney v. Slauson, 30…
2Cited by1 opinion
- The Alexander, Picket, MasterSupreme Court of the United States · 1814