Vigo Agricultural Soc. v. Brumfield

Citation1 N.E. 382, 102 Ind. 146
Case DateMay 26, 1885
CourtSupreme Court of Indiana

102 Ind. 146
1 N.E. 382

Vigo Agricultural Soc.
v.
Brumfield.

Supreme Court of Indiana.

Filed May 26, 1885.


Appeal from Vigo superior court.


Davis & Davis, for appellant.

Pierce & Harper and Rhoads & Williams, for appellee.


Elliott, J.

Gathered into a condensed form, the material averments of the appellee's complaint are these: The Vigo Agricultural Society is an association organized under the laws of the state for the purpose of conducting fairs for the exhibition of agricultural products, manufactured articles, and other things. Prior to September, 1883, the society issued advertisements inviting persons to place on exhibition at a fair to be held in that month. The society agreed to take care of articles placed on its ground by exhibitors. The appellee, in response to the invitation of the society, did put a gun, of which he was the owner, on exhibition in the place appropriated to that purpose, and, while the gun “was in the care and keeping of the society,” it negligently and carelessly suffered it to be stolen, without any fault on the part of the appellee.

The question presented by the demurrer to the complaint is, not as to the general duties and liabilities of an agricultural association, but the

[1 N.E. 383]

question is as to the law upon the facts pleaded. The case made by the complaint is one of bailment. The bailment was not a gratuitous one, for the reason that the exhibition of the gun, in response to the invitation contained in the advertisement of the appellant, constituted a consideration for the undertaking. It may be true that both parties derived a benefit, but this did not strip the contract of its character,-that of a bailment for reward. The reward was not, it is true, in money, but it was, nevertheless, a reward in the form of an act performed at the request of the bailee. An association which invites persons to supply articles to enable it to conduct an exhibition, receives some consideration from the person who responds to its invitation by placing articles in its care for exhibition. Where a consideration of an indeterminate value is agreed upon by the parties, the courts will not undertake to determine its adequacy, but will respect the judgment of the parties and enforce their contract. Wolford v. Powers, 85 Ind. 294; S. C. 44 Amer. Rep. 16; Williamson v. Hitner, 79 Ind. 233;Neidefer v. Chastain, 71 Ind. 363;Smock v. Pierson, 68 Ind. 405;Baker v. Roberts, 14 Ind. 552;Hardesty v. Smith, 3 Ind. 39.

The complaint avers that there was an agreement to take care of the gun, and the facts stated show a sufficient consideration for the agreement; and, as the contract was one of bailment for hire, the bailee is responsible for the loss resulting from its negligence. The agreement bound the society, and if its negligence caused the loss, it must respond. What the rule would be where there was no promise to bestow care upon the articles exhibited we need not decide, for here there was, as the complaint avers and the demurrer admits, a promise which created a bailment.

The appellant demurred to the evidence, and it is necessary, before entering upon the discussion of the main question, to ascertain and state the rules which must guide us in considering the evidence. These principles are well settled: First. The demurrer admits all the facts proved, admits the existence of all the facts which there is evidence tending to establish, and admits all reasonable inferences which may be drawn from the facts and the evidence. Wright v. Julian, 97 Ind. 109, and authorities cited, page 110; Willcuts v. Northwestern, etc., Co. 81 Ind. 300, and authorities cited. Second. “On a demurrer to evidence everything will be taken against the party demurring which the evidence tends to prove, including every fair inference to be drawn from the evidence.” Eagan v. Downing, 55 Ind. 65;Pinnell v. Stringer, 59 Ind. 555;Radcliff v. Radford, 96 Ind. 482.Third. On a demurrer there is no weighing of the evidence; all inferences are against the demurring party; and where there is a conflict, evidence favorable to him cannot be considered. Ruddell v. Tyner, 87 Ind. 529;Adams v. Slate, 87 Ind. 573;Bethell v. Bethell, 92 Ind. 318;vide page 325; Wright v. Julian, supra.

Guided by these rules our task is to ascertain what facts the evidence tends to prove; what inferences these facts...

To continue reading

Request your trial
22 practice notes
  • Gunn v. Ohio River R. Co.
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of West Virginia
    • December 9, 1896
    ...3 Leigh, 147; 23 Gratt. 619-38; 31 Gratt. 812; 29 W. Va. 98; 30 W, Va. 228; 35 W. Va. 389; 106 111. 563; 18 111. App. 142; 104 Ind. 293; 102 Ind. 146; 32 Kan. 533; 1 Shearm. & Red. Neg. §§ 75, 130; Whart. Neg. § 311; 2 Wood Ry. Law, 1284; 31 Kan. 1; 19 Kan. 382; 2 Tuck. Comm. 291, 292; 18 I......
  • Riordan v. Horton
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Wyoming
    • March 9, 1908
    ...32 Hun, 619; In re Hodgeman's Est., 35 N.E. 660; Bassett v. Miller, 8 Md., 551; Walford v. Powers, 85 Ind. 294; Soc. v. Brumfield, 102 Ind. 146; Kellar v. Orr, 106 Ind. 406; Polk v. Johnson, 65 N.E. 537; Steel v. Halladay, 25 P. 77; Ross v. Conwell, 34 N.E. 752; In re Mulligan's Est., 27 A.......
  • White v. Burke, 30531.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Washington
    • October 7, 1948
    ...sending articles for exhibition, when the articles were received and accepted by the defendant. [Vigo Agricultural] Society v. Brumfiel, 102 Ind. 146, 1 N.E. 382 [52 Am.Rep. 657]; 1 Whart.Cont. § 24; Pol.Cont. 174. The contract was supported by a legal consideration,--the detriment and inco......
  • Kincaid v. Lazar, No. 1-180A23
    • United States
    • Indiana Court of Appeals of Indiana
    • June 17, 1980
    ...its adequacy but will respect the judgment of the parties and enforce this contract. Vigo Agricultural Society v. Brumfiel, (1885) 102 Ind. 146, 1 N.E. 382; Cook v. American States Insurance Company, (1971) 150 Ind.App. 88, 275 N.E.2d 832; Wilson v. Dexter, Executor, (1963) 135 Ind.App. 247......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
20 cases
  • Gunn v. Ohio River R. Co.
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of West Virginia
    • December 9, 1896
    ...3 Leigh, 147; 23 Gratt. 619-38; 31 Gratt. 812; 29 W. Va. 98; 30 W, Va. 228; 35 W. Va. 389; 106 111. 563; 18 111. App. 142; 104 Ind. 293; 102 Ind. 146; 32 Kan. 533; 1 Shearm. & Red. Neg. §§ 75, 130; Whart. Neg. § 311; 2 Wood Ry. Law, 1284; 31 Kan. 1; 19 Kan. 382; 2 Tuck. Comm. 291, 292; 18 I......
  • Riordan v. Horton
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Wyoming
    • March 9, 1908
    ...32 Hun, 619; In re Hodgeman's Est., 35 N.E. 660; Bassett v. Miller, 8 Md., 551; Walford v. Powers, 85 Ind. 294; Soc. v. Brumfield, 102 Ind. 146; Kellar v. Orr, 106 Ind. 406; Polk v. Johnson, 65 N.E. 537; Steel v. Halladay, 25 P. 77; Ross v. Conwell, 34 N.E. 752; In re Mulligan's Est., 27 A.......
  • White v. Burke, 30531.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Washington
    • October 7, 1948
    ...sending articles for exhibition, when the articles were received and accepted by the defendant. [Vigo Agricultural] Society v. Brumfiel, 102 Ind. 146, 1 N.E. 382 [52 Am.Rep. 657]; 1 Whart.Cont. § 24; Pol.Cont. 174. The contract was supported by a legal consideration,--the detriment and inco......
  • Kincaid v. Lazar, No. 1-180A23
    • United States
    • Indiana Court of Appeals of Indiana
    • June 17, 1980
    ...its adequacy but will respect the judgment of the parties and enforce this contract. Vigo Agricultural Society v. Brumfiel, (1885) 102 Ind. 146, 1 N.E. 382; Cook v. American States Insurance Company, (1971) 150 Ind.App. 88, 275 N.E.2d 832; Wilson v. Dexter, Executor, (1963) 135 Ind.App. 247......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT