Thompson v. Thompson
Decision Date | 31 January 1872 |
Citation | 5 W.Va. 190 |
Parties | George P. Thompson v. Elizabeth Thompson. |
Court | West Virginia Supreme Court |
E. T. brings assumpsit against g. T. On the trial it is proved that F. T. was the business agent of E. T., to hire out slaves, &c. In the years 1855-6-7, be hired a slave to one Turner, and took bonds payable to himself for the hire thereof Subsequently F. T. died, and g. T. became his administrator, who collected the bonds for the hire of the slave to Turner, aud as such administrator accounted for the same to the estate of F. T., and disbursed the amount in the settlement thereof. It was further proved that when G. T. collected the money on the bonds, he was told by Turner that they were given for the hire of plaintiffs slave; which defendant, g. T., also admitted that he knew, on the trial. This amount was one of the items in the bill of particulars; whereupon the defendant moved the court to instruct the jury," If the jury are satisfied that the bonds of Turner paid after his death to defendant, as administrator of Francis Thompson, were made payable to said Francis Thompson, the legal title of said bonds were in said F. Thompson, although the negro woman, for the hire of which the bonds were given, belonged to the plaintiff, and that her title to said bonds, being equitable only, are not recoverable in this action," which the court refused to give, and he excepted. Held:
I. The plaintiff was proceeding under the common counts for money had
and received, not for the bonds nor title thereto, but for the money that resulted from the hire of her slave; and it made no difference whether her title to the money was legal or equitable, if she had title thereto, she could recover under this action.
II. It was immaterial how the agent secured the payment of the money; it was plain tiff's money, and whoever collected it and retained it. knowing the facts, would be liable, and this action would lie to recover it.
III., The action of assumpsit is a liberal and equitable one. It is applicable to almost every case where money has been received winch in equity and good conscience ought to be refunded.
Action of assumpsit in the circuit court of Kanawha county; declaration filed at May rules, 1869. Judgment for plaintiff at June term, 1870.
The only point determined in this court arose on the instructions asked by the defendant, which the court refused to give (except the refusal of the court to grant a new trial because the verdict was contrary to the evidence), and is amply stated in the opinion of Moore, J.
Smith & Knight for plaintiff in error.
Miller and Mollohan & Nash for defendant in error.
the case in assumpsit. This was an action of trespass on The declaration consists of the common counts, and a special count on a lease. The account filed with the declaration states distinctly the several items of the plaintiff's claim; two of the items are stated as follows, viz:
The defendant pleaded non-assumpsit, payment and set-offs. Issues joined. Upon the trial it appears from the bill of exceptions setting out the facts proved, that the plaintiff, among other facts, proved that Francis Thompson, deceased, was the agent of the plaintiff in the years 1851-5-6-7-8-9 and 1860, to hire out her negroes, lease her farm and transact other busi-" ness for her; that in the years 1855, 1856 and 1857, said Francis Thompson, as such agent, hired a negro woman, belonging to the plaintiff, to John P. Turner, and took bonds from said Turner in each case of hiring, in his own name, payable to himself; that after the death of said F. Thompson, the defendant, G. P. Thompson, as administrator of said Francis Thompson's estate, collected from Turner's estate the amount of the said bonds, and as such administrator, accounted for the same to the estate of said F. Thompson, and disbursed the amount so collected in the settlement of said Thompson's estate. It was also proved that when the defendant collected this money on the bonds aforesaid, he was told by Turner that they were for the hire of a negro woman belonging to plaintiff. And defendant admitted at the trial that he knew the bonds were for the hire of plaintiff's negro woman.
The defendant asked the court to give the following instruction to the jury, viz:" If the jury are satisfied that the bonds of Turner, paid after his death to defendant, as administrator of Francis Thompson, were made payable to said Francis Thompson, the legal title of said bonds were in said F. Thompson, although the negro...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
United States v. Union Livestock Sales Company
...was of the fact that the estate had no title to the property. This decision was cited with approval in West Virginia in Thompson v. Thompson, 5 W.Va. 190, 193 (1879), in which the court held the administrator liable for the proceeds of the sale of a slave and the distribution of the proceed......
-
State Of West Va. v. Conley.
...It is applicable to almost every case where money has been received which in equity and good conscience ought to be refunded." Thompson v. Thompson, 5 W. Va. 190; Jackson v. Hough, 38 W. Va. 236, 18 S. E. 575; Hughes v. Frum, 41 W. Va. 445, 23 S. E. 604. "An action of assumpsit lies upon a ......
-
State v. Conley
...It is applicable to almost every case where money has been received which in equity and good conscience ought to be refunded." Thompson v. Thompson, 5 W.Va. 190; Jackson v. Hough, 38 W.Va. 236, 18 S.E. Hughes v. Frum, 41 W.Va. 445, 23 S.E. 604. "An action of assumpsit lies upon a promise ex......
-
Yager v. Exch. Nat. Bank of Hastings
...order to establish the plaintiff's case it was necessary to trace his rights through facts ordinarily of equitable cognizance. Thompson v. Thompson, 5 W. Va. 190. It has been held in this state that under the general issue in ejectment the defendant may prove any fact which defeats the plai......