Marr v. Barrett
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
On Report from Nisi Prius, May, J., presiding. This was an action of trover to recover the value of a quantity of hay, belonging to the plaintiff, which he had intrusted to the defendant, as his factor, to sell in Wiscasset at a specified price. The defendant, however, without instructions to that effect, sent it to Boston, and there sold it. 1. For an agent to sell at an under price is no conversion, and trover does not lie.
Read the full summary
On Report from Nisi Prius, May, J., presiding. This was an action of trover to recover the value of a quantity of hay, belonging to the plaintiff, which he had intrusted to the defendant, as his factor, to sell in Wiscasset at a specified price. The defendant, however, without instructions to that effect, sent it to Boston, and there sold it. 1. For an agent to sell at an under price is no conversion, and trover does not lie. Stephen’s N. P., vol. 3. pp. 2683-4; Dufresne v. Hutchinson, 3 Taunt. 117; Sargent v. Blunt, 16 Johns. 74; Cairns v. Bleeker, 12 Johns. 300. 2. A mere wrongful…
1Opinion of the CourtCutting, J.
The principal question presented is, was the defendant guilty of a wrongful conversion in shipping the hay under the circumstances disclosed by the testimony ?
That the hay was originally deposited in the defendant’s storehouse, on Brooks’ wharf in Wiscasset, to be by him shipped to Boston, for sale, is a fact established by the evidence.
The defendant then became the plaintiff’s factor and subject to the rules of law regulating such relations, j The letter of the plaintiff, of June 17, 1854, countermanded the orders to ship, but authorized a sale at Wiscasset at a specified price.
The…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- William & James Brown & Co. v. McGranSupreme Court of the United States · 1840
- Norval v. CornellNew York Supreme Court · 1819
3Cited by2 opinions
- Romeo v. MartucciSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1900
- Foerderer v. Tradesmen's Nat. Bank of New YorkCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1901