Fletcher v. Fletcher
Superior Court of New Hampshire
This was an action of trover for three promissory notes, and was submitted to the decision of the court upon the following facts : On the 11th February, 1834, the plaintiff placed in the hands of the defendant three promissory notes, which were payable to order, to be collected by the defendant. On the 24th February, 1834, one Lemuel Miller commenced an action against this plaintiff, in which this defendant was summoned as trustee.
Read the full summary
This was an action of trover for three promissory notes, and was submitted to the decision of the court upon the following facts : On the 11th February, 1834, the plaintiff placed in the hands of the defendant three promissory notes, which were payable to order, to be collected by the defendant. On the 24th February, 1834, one Lemuel Miller commenced an action against this plaintiff, in which this defendant was summoned as trustee. On the 28th February, 1834, after the trustee process was served upon the defendant, the plaintiff drew an order in writing, directing the defendant to deliver the…
1Opinion of the CourtRichardson, C. J.
In trover the conversion is the very gist of the action, and the question in this case is, whether the facts stated show a conversion ?
Where there is a tortious taking of goods, this is in law a conversion. But when the goods came lawfully into the hands of the defendant, as by finding, or by delivery of the owner, then in order to maintain trover, some tortious act subsequently done, and amounting to a conversion, must be shown.
In general, a demand of the goods by the plaintiff, and a refusal by the defendant to deliver them, is proof of a conversion.
But to this rule there are exceptions.…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Sargent v. GileSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1836
- Clement v. LeverettSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1841