Lehmann v. Schmidt
California Supreme Court
Appeal from, a judgment of the Superior Court of the city and county of San Francisco. The action was brought by the plaintiff, as the assignee of E. B. Smith, in the form of a complaint in assumpsit for goods, wares, and merchandise sold and delivered to defendant at his request, viz.: Nine thousand gallons of wine, at twenty cents a gallon, amounting in the aggregate to the sum of eighteen hundred dollars.
Read the full summary
Appeal from, a judgment of the Superior Court of the city and county of San Francisco. The action was brought by the plaintiff, as the assignee of E. B. Smith, in the form of a complaint in assumpsit for goods, wares, and merchandise sold and delivered to defendant at his request, viz.: Nine thousand gallons of wine, at twenty cents a gallon, amounting in the aggregate to the sum of eighteen hundred dollars. The defendant denied all of the allegations of the complaint, and set up the following special contract:— “ Office of R. Schmidt, California Wine Growers’ Agent, 304 Battery Street.—Main…
1Opinion of the CourtPaterson, J.
The authorities are clear upon the proposition that when one person converts to his own use the personal property of another, the latter may waive the tort, and sue in assumpsit for the value thereof. (Pratt v. Clark, 12 Cal. 89; Roberts v. Evans, 43 Cal. 380; Berly v. Taylor, 5 Hill, 577; 2 Greenl. Ev., sec. 108.) But it is contended by appellant that the defendant had a lien on the wine for money paid out and advanced, and that his refusal to comply with the plaintiff's demand did not constitute a conversion. The court found, however, that the defendant advanced on account of said wines,…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Everett v. SaltusNew York Supreme Court · 1836
- Roberts v. EvansCalifornia Supreme Court · 1872
- Hanna v. PhelpsIndiana Supreme Court · 1855
- Zirker v. HughesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1888
- Fratt v. ClarkCalifornia Supreme Court · 1859
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by22 opinions
- Goodley v. Wank & Wank, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1976
- Philpott v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1934
- Victor Oil Co. v. DrumCalifornia Supreme Court · 1920
- H. Russell Taylor's Fire Prevention Service, Inc. v. Coca Cola Bottling Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1979
- Brittan v. Oakland Bank of SavingsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.