Folsom v. Clemence
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Tort for the conversion of certain furniture and store fixtures. Writ dated September 20, 1873. At the trial in the Superior Court, before Pitman, J., without a jury, it was admitted that the alleged conversion was at the same time and by the same act as that of the stock in trade in the same store, for which the plaintiff had recovered judgment against the defendant in a former action, reported 111 Mass. 273. The plaintiff offered to prove the same title and facts as in the…
Read the full summary
Tort for the conversion of certain furniture and store fixtures. Writ dated September 20, 1873. At the trial in the Superior Court, before Pitman, J., without a jury, it was admitted that the alleged conversion was at the same time and by the same act as that of the stock in trade in the same store, for which the plaintiff had recovered judgment against the defendant in a former action, reported 111 Mass. 273. The plaintiff offered to prove the same title and facts as in the former action; that the property which was the subject of the present action was not included in the former one,…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court.
The taking by one act of several chattels of the same person will not sustain more than one action. The judgment in the first action is a bar to this. Marble v. Keyes, 9 Gray, 221. Bennett v. Hood, 1 Allen, 47. Trask v. Hartford & New Haven Railroad, 2 Allen, 331.
Exceptions overruled.
2Cited by14 opinions
- Bliss v. New York Central & Hudson River RailroadMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1894
- Wheeler Savings Bank v. TraceySupreme Court of Missouri · 1897
- Magaw v. BealsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1930
- Funk v. FunkMissouri Court of Appeals · 1889
- Huffman v. KnightOregon Supreme Court · 1900
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.