McCabe v. Maguire

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

McCabe v. Maguire

65 N.E. 162, 182 Mass. 255, 1902 Mass. LEXIS 1005

CourtMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

DecidedNovember 17, 1902

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 65 N.E. 162 (McCabe v. Maguire) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

McCabe v. Maguire, 65 N.E. 162, 182 Mass. 255, 1902 Mass. LEXIS 1005 (Mass. 1902).

Pincite

Opinion

Holmes, C. J.

So far as appears, the defendant may have had the money in his possession or control at the time of the demand upon him. He must be assumed to have had it, in view of the finding for the plaintiff. If he had had the chattels originally attached and had refused to deliver them on demand, he would have been liable in tort for a conversion. Appleton v. Bancroft, 10 Met. 231, 236. Under circumstances like the present, one remedy at least for the conversion of money not in a bag is money had and received. See Allen v. Wright, 134 Mass. 347, 350; Chapman v. Cole, 12 Gray, 141,143 ; (Pitlock v. Wells, 109 Mass. 452, 456;) Mason v. Waite, 17 Mass. 560; Bretton v. Barnet, Owen, 86; Clarke v. Shee, Cowper, 197; Neate v. Harding, 6 Exch. 349. In such cases the defendant cannot escape on the ground that he is a deputy sheriff only, and not the sheriff. Draper v. Arnold, 12 Mass. 449. jRobinson v. Hnsign, 6 Gray, 300, 304, 305.

Exceptions overruled.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Holmes, C. J.

So far as appears, the defendant may have had the money in his possession or control at the time of the demand upon him. He must be assumed to have had it, in view of the finding for the plaintiff. If he had had the chattels originally attached and had refused to deliver them on demand, he would have been liable in tort for a conversion. Appleton v. Bancroft, 10 Met. 231, 236. Under circumstances like the present, one remedy at least for the conversion of money not in a bag is money had and received. See Allen v. Wright, 134 Mass. 347, 350; Chapman v. Cole, 12 Gray, 141,143 ; (Pitlock v. Wells, 109 Mass. 452, 456;) Mason v. Waite, 17 Mass. 560; Bretton v. Barnet, Owen, 86; Clarke v. Shee, Cowper, 197; Neate v. Harding, 6 Exch. 349. In such cases the defendant cannot escape on the ground that he is a deputy sheriff only, and not the sheriff. Draper v. Arnold, 12 Mass. 449. jRobinson v. Hnsign, 6 Gray, 300, 304, 305.

Exceptions overruled.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

65 N.E. 162, 182 Mass. 255, 1902 Mass. LEXIS 1005, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mccabe-v-maguire-mass-1902.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack