Stoddard v. Ham
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Tort for the conversion of a quantity of bricks. Answer, a general denial. Trial in the Superior Court, without a jury, before Pitman, J., who reported the case for the determination of this court upon the following facts found by him: The plaintiffs were manufacturers of and dealers in bricks, at Bangor, Maine.
Read the full summary
Tort for the conversion of a quantity of bricks. Answer, a general denial. Trial in the Superior Court, without a jury, before Pitman, J., who reported the case for the determination of this court upon the following facts found by him: The plaintiffs were manufacturers of and dealers in bricks, at Bangor, Maine. The bricks in question were there purchased of the plaintiffs by Charles E. Leonard, who did a commission business in that city, but sometimes bought on his own account. The plaintiffs supposed they were selling these bricks to the defendant through Leonard as his agent; and they were…
1Opinion of the Court
Colt, 3.
This case was tried without a jury, and there is no reason to doubt that, upon the facts found by the judge, it was correctly ruled that the plaintiffs could not recover in tort for the conversion of the property in dispute.
It is not enough to give the plaintiffs a right to recover, that they supposed they were selling bricks to the defendant, through Leonard his agent, and that they would not have sold them to Leonard on his sole credit. The judge found that they were in fact sold to Leonard. There was no fraud, no false representation of agency, or pretence on the part of Leonard…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Boston Ice Co. v. PotterMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1877
- Foster v. RopesMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1872
- Daley v. CarneyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1875
3Cited by20 opinions
- Brighton Packing Co. v. Butchers' Slaughtering & Melting Ass'nMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1912
- Foote v. CottingMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1907
- Lunn & Sweet Co. v. WolfmanMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1929
- Kelly Asphalt Block Co. v. Barber Asphalt Paving Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1914
- Austin v. SeligmanU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York · 1883
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.