Neff v. Landis

• Decision Date: 05 October 1885
• Citation: 1 A. 177,110 Pa. St. 204
• Parties: NEFF v. LANDIS.
• Court: Maine Supreme Court

1 A. 177

110 Pa. St. 204

NEFF

v. LANDIS.¹

SUPREME COURT OF MAINE.

Filed October 5, 1885.

Error to court of common pleas, Lancaster county.

Replevin by A. P. Neff against Jacob R. Landis. G. G. Landis, a minor, by representing himself as of full age and as backed by his father, Jacob R. Landis, and one N. N. Bender, prevailed upon A. P. Neff to ship to him from York county, Pennsylvania, to Lima, Ohio, where he stated that he was about to set up in business, two cases of cigars. These he never paid for, but allowed his father to take them, with other cases of cigars procured in the same way from other parties, back to Pennsylvania and store them in his barn. Plaintiff offered to prove that John A. Kraft, one of the said parties, hearing that Jacob R. Landis had a lot of cigars obtained from G. G. Landis, at Lima, Ohio, visited Jacob R. Landis, but did not find the cigars which had been ordered of him. He, however, asked him to let him have some of those which were there. This he refused, admitting at the same time that he had got them from his son, on the ground that he might be liable to the other parties, among whom was A. P. Neff, whose goods were there, and saying that he would have to see his son. Upon being asked, he said he did not know where his son was or when he would return. The court refused this offer. A domestic attachment was afterwards issued by Kraft, and dissolved on the ground that G. G. Landis was a minor. A nonsuit was filed by the court, and a rule to show cause why it should not be taken off discharged. This writ was then taken.

H. H. McClune and J. W. Johnson, for plaintiff in error.

The defendant should have been compelled to show his title. Tainter v. Hyneman, 6 Phila. 202. There was sufficient evidence to go to a jury. Bevan v. Insurance Co., 9 Watts & S., 187, Hill's Adm'rs v. National Trust Co., 15 W'kly Notes Cas.

Hay Brown, for defendant in error.

Plaintiff in replevin must recover on the strength of his own title. Rcinheimer v. Hemingway, 35 Pa. St. 432.

CLARK, J. The plaintiff, at the trial of this case, offered to prove that G. G. Landis, at the time of the purchase of the cigars in suit, represented that he had just arrived at the age of 21 years, and was about to engage in business on his own account, at Lima, Ohio, and that his father, Jacob R. Landis, the defendant, and one N. N. Bender were "backing him in the business;" that by means of those representations he obtained the goods; that subsequently, when the cigars were attached for this and other debts, he pleaded his minority, and the plaintiff was defeated in the action on that ground. The refusal of this offer constitutes the principal assignment of error.

It is admitted that, at the time of the purchase of the cigars, Landis, the son, was in fact a minor; that the representations made by him in this regard were wholly untrue, and it is not pretended that there was anything in his appearance, or otherwise, to put parties dealing with him on their guard. It cannot be doubted that a minor who, under such circumstances, obtains the property of another by pretending to be of full age and legally responsible, when in fact he is not, is guilty of a fraud by false pretense, for which he is answerable under the criminal law. 2 Whart. Crim. Law, 2099.

A contract induced by such fraud as does not involve a public wrong, the adjustment of which is against public policy, is, in general, voidable only, not void, and the party defrauded may, at his option, confirm or repudiate it. The contract only becomes void after it has been avoided; therefore, in the case of a sale of goods induced by the fraud of the vendee, the vendor may, excepting in the cases mentioned, sue in assumpsit for the price in affirmance of the contract, or in trover or replevin in...