Westheimer v. State Loan Co.
| Decision Date | 15 May 1907 |
| Parties | WESTHEIMER et al. v. STATE LOAN CO. |
| Court | United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court |
Lee M. Friedman, for plaintiffs.
Walter A. Buie and Clarence F. Eldredge, for defendant.
The issues in this case, as stated by the judge in his charge to the jury, are very simple. They are whether the plaintiffs were the owners of the whisky at the time of the alleged conversion, and whether the defendant converted it. The first issue includes the question whether the goods are identified as property that once belonged to the plaintiffs, and if so whether they parted with their title before the conversion. There was testimony from one of the plaintiffs, by a deposition, that his firm shipped to one Bowen three barrels of Hornpipe whisky and one barrel of Boston League Whisky and that each of the barrels was marked with its proper brand, three with the name 'Hornpipe' and one with the name 'Boston League.' The manner and circumstances of making the shipments, which were called for by the question, were shown only by an answer that the firm notified their teamster to ship to Bowen four barrels of Hornpipe whisky and one of Boston League whisky. It does not appear that the witness did not have other knowledge that the shipment was made. In another answer the witness gave the value of the whisky shipped to Bowen, referring to it by a general statement similar to the first. Bowen testified to having received four barrels of whisky bearing the plaintiffs' brand, marked like those referred to by the former witness. It appears that the arrangement for the receipt of this whisky by Bowen was made by one Hanley who was employed by the plaintiffs to solicit orders for the sale of their whisky and to make collections.
There was ample evidence to warrant the jury in finding that the whisky received by Bowen came from the plaintiffs' stock and that the plaintiffs never parted with their title to it. There was testimony from Kimball, the defendant's treasure, that he bought four barrels of whisky from Hanley which was then stored on Bowen's premises, and which Hanley said he owned. It appeared that the defendant replevied from Bowen four barrels of whisky branded like those described by the plaintiff in his deposition, and that this whisky was received from the officer by the defendant, and afterwards sold and the proceeds of it received by the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Rice v. New York Cent. & H.R.R. Co.
...its managing officers. If this contention were supported by the evidence, doubtless it might be a good one. But this is not the case. [195 Mass. 510]Harris did not hold himself out as representing the defendant; he made no promise that the defendant would meet the expenses of the funeral; o......
- Rice v. New York Cent. & H.R.r. Co.
-
Westheimer v. State Loan Co.
...195 Mass. 51081 N.E. 289WESTHEIMER et al.v.STATE LOAN CO.Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, Suffolk.May 15, Exceptions from Superior Court, Suffolk County; Charles U. Bell, Judge. Action for conversion by Ferdinand Westheimer and others against the State Loan Company. From a judgment ......