Moore v. Simms
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from the Sullivan Circuit Court. — Hon. G. D. Burgess, Judge. x (1) The law is well settled that the purchase of property from one who had no right to sell constitutes a conversion, and the owner of the property can sustain replevin without demand, and the good faith of the buyer is no defense.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Sullivan Circuit Court. — Hon. G. D. Burgess, Judge. x (1) The law is well settled that the purchase of property from one who had no right to sell constitutes a conversion, and the owner of the property can sustain replevin without demand, and the good faith of the buyer is no defense. Wells on Replevin, sec. 365, p. 207 ; Williams v. Merle, 11 Wend. 80; Qilmore v. Wewton, 9 Allen (Mass.) 171; Farley v. Lincoln, 51 N. H. 577. (2) The doctrine now is that any taking or assumption' of a right to control or dispose of property constitutes a conversion.- Warwick v. Baker, 42 Mo.…
1Opinion of the CourtGill, J.
-This is replevin for a cow and her calf. The facts are: Plaintiff Moore owned a farm in Sullivan county, and on this farm he had a number of cows, the animal in controversy being one of them. Moore leased the farm for a period of five years beginning March 1, 1889, to one Gossett, and in this agreement of renting Gossett undertook to keep and care for the cows and was to < have therefor one-half of the increase. Gossett failed to pay the first year’s rent, and Moore thereupon sued for the rent and possession, and judgment was rendered in Moore’s favor on January 23, 1890. Thereupon Gossett,…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Norman v. HornMissouri Court of Appeals · 1889
- Warwick v. BakerMissouri Court of Appeals · 1890
3Cited by3 opinions
- Gilbert Book Co. v. SheridanMissouri Court of Appeals · 1905
- Bollman Bros. v. PeakeMissouri Court of Appeals · 1902
- Central Missouri Trust Co. v. WulfertMissouri Court of Appeals · 1917