Stearns v. Herrick
| Decision Date | 05 January 1882 |
| Citation | 132 Mass. 114 |
| Parties | Joshua B. Stearns v. Horatio G. Herrick |
| Court | United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court |
Argued November 2, 1881
Essex. Tort against the sheriff of Essex, for the conversion of the stock of goods in a grocery. Answer, that the goods were attached as the property of Joseph S. Stearns, on a writ in favor of F. H. Marshall, and that whatever title the plaintiff had to said goods was fraudulent as to the creditors of said Joseph. At the trial in the Superior Court before Brigham, C. J., the jury returned a verdict for the defendant; and the plaintiff alleged exceptions, which appear in the opinion.
Exceptions overruled.
S. B Ives, Jr., for the plaintiff.
H Carter, for the defendant.
OPINION
There was no error at the trial prejudicial to the plaintiff. The defendant attached a stock of goods in Groveland, as the property of one Joseph S. Stearns. The plaintiff contended that the stock of goods was wholly his; that he derived his title to a portion of them from Joseph S. Stearns directly; to another portion of them from Joseph S. Stearns's mother, who within a few days had purchased them of Joseph and sold them to him; and that subsequently to those purchases he had bought some articles in Boston and added them to the stock. The claim of the defendant was that this whole proceeding was a fraud, in which the plaintiff and Joseph participated, upon the creditors of Joseph; and that the business was still the business of Joseph. Upon these several claims, when the case came on for trial, the various questions were referred to an auditor, who "found generally for the defendant, on the ground that the sale by Joseph was fraudulent and void as against the creditors of said Joseph, and that the subsequent purchases were for the benefit of said Joseph."
It will be observed that no question can arise upon the intermixture of goods, or upon the relative duties of the parties in reference thereto, until it is established that the original purchase of Joseph was fraudulent, and the subsequent purchase or purchases valid; for if the original purchase were valid, and not fraudulent, the plaintiff would be entitled to recover for the value of the entire property, so that the question of intermixture cannot arise, until it is proved that he has himself made the intermixture of his own goods with others which he knew he had obtained fraudulently,...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People's Nat. Bank v. Mulholland
...298, 306;Willard v. Rice, 11 Metc. 493,45 Am. Dec. 226; Smith v. Sanborn, 6 Gray, 134; Adams v. Wildes, 107 Mass. 123, 125;Stearns v. Herrick, 132 Mass. 114;Union Naval Stores Co. v. United States, 240 U. S. 284, 290, 36 Sup. Ct. 308, 60 L. Ed. 644. See Westinghouse Electric & Mfg. Co. v. W......
-
Moors v. Reading
... ... § ... 40; Willard v. Rice, 11 Metc. (Mass.) 493; Adams ... v. Wildes, 107 Mass. 125; Stearns v. Herrick, ... 132 Mass. 114; The Idaho, 93 U.S. 575. Upon the undisputed ... facts, the plaintiffs failed to retain such possession as the ... ...
-
Hittinger Fruit Co. v. City of Cambridge
...plaintiff as much as it thus has appropriated. Ryder v. Hathaway, 21 Pick. 298; Willard v. Rice, 11 Metc. 493, 45 Am. Dec. 226; Stearns v. Herrick, 132 Mass. 114; Levyeau v. Clements, 175 Mass. 376, 56 N.E. 735, L. R. A. 397; Hart v. Ten Eyck, 2 Johns. Ch. (N. Y.) 62, 108; The Idaho, 93 U.S......
-
Peoples National Bank v. Mulholland
...Hathaway, 21 Pick. 298, 306. Willard v. Rice, 11 Met. 493. Smith v. Sanborn, 6 Gray, 134. Adams v. Wildes, 107 Mass. 123 , 125. Stearns v. Herrick, 132 Mass. 114 Union Naval Stores Co. v. United States, 240 U.S. 284, 290. See Westinghouse Electric & Manuf. Co. v. Wagner Electric & Manuf. Co......