Tyndale v. Randall

• Decision Date: 25 June 1891
• Citation: 154 Mass. 103,27 N.E. 882
• Parties: TYNDALE v. RANDALL.
• Court: United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court

154 Mass. 103

27 N.E. 882

TYNDALE v. RANDALL.

Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, Suffolk.

June 25, 1891

Exceptions from superior court, Suffolk county; JOHN LATHROP, Judge.

HEADNOTES

Contracts 192

95 ----

95II Construction and Operation

95II(C) Subject-Matter

95k192 Property and Rights Therein in General.

One receiving coupons from another, with understanding that they are to be collected when due, and proceeds remitted to latter, if living, and, if not, kept as compensation for services rendered, becomes entitled to coupons not due and proceeds not remitted at time of death.

COUNSEL

J.R. Smith, for plaintiff.

A. Russ and D.A. Dorr, for defendant.

OPINION

HOLMES, J.

This is an action to recover the proceeds or value of certain coupons received by the defendant from Dama, the plaintiff's intestate, to collect. The real difference between the plaintiff and the defendant, in their argument before us, is in the interpretation of the defendant's evidence. The defendant testified in different forms that Dama, after delivering the coupons to him, told him to remit the proceeds to Dama, who was just returning to San Francisco, but if Dama never came back to keep them in part pay for services. The plaintiff treats this as language looking only to the future, as in Fearing v. Jones, 149 Mass. 12, 20 N.E. 199. But it was at least possible for the jury to find that Dama purported to transfer a present right to the defendant, and that the case stood as if Dama had delivered the coupons to the defendant at the moment of the conversation as his property, whether by way of gift or payment is not material, on the condition, however, that if Dama was alive when the coupons fell due, then the proceeds should be remitted to him. If the jury found that to be what happened, the defendant got a good title to the coupons not due at Dama's death. This is what we understand the instructions to the jury to mean. See Davis v. Ney, 125 Mass. 590; Stone v. Hackett, 12 Gray, 227. Exceptions overruled.