Race v. Chandler
Decision Date | 31 October 1884 |
Citation | 15 Bradw. 532,15 Ill.App. 532 |
Parties | RICHARD T. RACEv.ALBERT F. CHANDLER. |
Court | United States Appellate Court of Illinois |
ERROR to the Superior Court of Cook county; the Hon. ELLIOTT ANTHONY, Judge, presiding. Opinion filed November 11, 1884.
This was an action of trover, brought by Albert F. Chandler against Richard T. Race, to recover damages for the conversion of three promissory notes, one for $1,410, dated May 19, 1876, and the other two for $200 each, dated August 2, 1876, all bearing interest at the rate of eight per cent. per annum. At the trial, without a jury, the court found the defendant guilty, and assessed the plaintiff's damages at $1,810, the face of the notes, without interest.
These notes originally belonged to the defendant and were drawn payable to his order, but were assigned and transferred by him to the plaintiff, together with certain deeds of trust securing the same, shortly after their execution, in payment for a bill of merchandise. Afterward, on the 16th day of August, 1877, the plaintiff delivered them back to the defendant and took from him a receipt, acknowledging that he had received them from the plaintiff “for collection, or transfer for his benefit.” Said notes were never collected or transferred by the defendant but were in his possession at the time of the commencement of the suit, and the principal question in the case was whether the evidence established a conversion.
The only witnesses who testified were the plaintiff, the defendant and the plaintiff's attorney. The plaintiff's testimony on this point was as follows:
Sprague, the plaintiff's attorney, testified: What is your brother's name?' I asked, and he said ‘A. S. Race.’ Mr. Race did not call on me on the 27th nor the 28th, and I waited until the 3d of March, and not hearing from him I brought this suit. On the 5th of March he came into my office and brought with him what purported to be the notes in question, and offered them to me but I declined to receive them. I told him that I had commenced suit and could not accept them, at least until I had heard from my client. He went away, however, leaving the notes upon my table, and I took them after he went away and put them into my drawer. Later in the day he called with his attorney to talk with me in regard to the notes, and I said, ‘Here are your notes; you can have them,’ and after some conversation he took them away. I told him in that conversation that I should have to insist upon our rights, as he had not brought them around as he agreed to and I had brought this suit.”
The defendant testified as follows: ...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Pantz v. Nelson
... ... 906; Fifield v. Maine C. R. Co., 62 Maine ... 77; Phelps v. Gilchrist, 28 N.H. 266; McLean v ... Graham, 5 U. C. Q. B. O. S. 741; Race v ... Chandler, 15 Ill.App. 532; Pollard v. Pollard, ... 207 Ala. 270, 92 So. 488; Greenberg v. Stevens, 212 ... Ill. 606, 72 N.E. 722; ... ...
-
Pantz v. Nelson
...114 N.W. 906; Fifield v. Maine C.R. Co., 62 Maine 77; Phelps v. Gilchrist, 28 N.H. 266; McLean v. Graham, 5 U.C.Q.B.O.S. 741; Race v. Chandler, 15 Ill. App. 532; Pollard v. Pollard, 207 Ala. 270, 92 So. 488; Greenberg v. Stevens, 212 Ill. 606, 72 N.E. 722; Supervisors of Kewaunee County v. ......
-
Rialto Company v. Miner
... ... 417; Bolling v ... Kirby, 95 Ala. 215; Davis & Son v. Hurt, 114 ... Ala. 146; Sturgis v. Reith, 57 Ill. 451; Rose v ... Chandler, 15 Ill.App. 532; Stock Yards Co. v ... Hawkins, 8 Kan.App. 155; 38 Cyc. 2008; 28 Am. & Eng ... Ency. of Law, p. 682 ... ...
-
Weiland Tool & Mfg. Co. v. Whitney
...a conversion ensued from Weiland's breach at that time. 'The action of trover cannot rest upon a mere breach of contract.' Race v. Chandler, 15 Ill.App. 532, 540. The gist of the action of converssion in Illinois as in most states is the proof of wrongful deprivation of property to one enti......