Pabst Brewing Co. v. Greenberg

• Decision Date: 02 June 1902
• Docket Number: 1,699.
• Citation: 117 F. 135
• Parties: PABST BREWING CO. v. GREENBERG et al.
• Court: U.S. Court of Appeals — Eighth Circuit

117 F. 135

PABST BREWING CO. v. GREENBERG et al.

No. 1,699.

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.

June 2, 1902

John H Ives, for plaintiff in error.

Moritz Heim and Stevens, O'Brien, Cole & Albrecht, for defendants in error.

Before SANBORN and THAYER, Circuit Judges, and CARLAND, District judge.

CARLAND District Judge.

Greenberg Bros., hereafter called 'plaintiffs,' sued the Pabst Brewing Company, hereafter called 'defendant,' in the court below, in trespass, for the wrongful and forcible taking from the peaceable possession of said Greenberg Bros of 10,000 glass bottles, the property of said plaintiffs, and of the value of at least $500. The complaint alleged that said 'Pabst Brewing Company, its agents and servants willfully and maliciously, with strong hands and a multitude of people, forcibly entered said plaintiffs' warehouse and took possession thereof, accompanying said conduct with insulting, abusive, and oppressive demeanor towards plaintiffs, and wrongfully and unlawfully and by threats of violence intimidated the plaintiffs, and against their will destroyed and removed from said premises all of said personal property, and converted the same to its own use, to the damage of plaintiffs in the sum of ten thousand dollars. ' The defendant, by its answer admitted that about March 2, 1900, upon the invitation and consent of Greenberg Bros., it took from the possession of said Greenberg Bros. not to exceed 500 bottles, of the value of $10, which bottles were the property of the brewing company; and denied any trespass or wrongful taking.

At the trial court below it appeared that on or about March 2, 1900 the representatives of several brewing companies went to plaintiffs' place of business in St. Paul, Minn., and then and there, according to defendant's evidence, each brewing company, with plaintiffs' consent, took from plaintiffs certain beer bottles which belonged respectively to each of said brewing companies. Plaintiffs introduced testimony tending to show that the bottles were taken by force. It was practically conceded at the trial that the bottles taken or destroyed were the property of the brewing companies, the only questions going to the jury being: First, the number of bottles taken or destroyed; second, whether they were taken by force, and, if by force, the amount of the damage. The learned trial court instructed the jury that, if they should find that the bottles...