Wells v. Connable
This text of 138 Mass. 513 (Wells v. Connable) 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.
Opinion
We are of opinion that the second count of .the plaintiff’s declaration is a count in tort in the nature of trover. [515]*515It alleges that the defendant “ has converted said property to his own use.” This allegation cannot be rejected as surplusage; it gives character to the count.
If the defendant had demurred to the count, he would have been met by the answer that it was a good count in trover. The count means the same as if it had been, in form, that the defendant has converted the property to his own use by a sale without notice to the plaintiff. The defendant has the right thus to interpret it, and to come to the trial relying upon the settled law that a mortgagor cannot maintain trover against his mortgagee. Landon v. Emmons, 97 Mass. 37. Exceptions sustained.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
138 Mass. 513, 1885 Mass. LEXIS 243, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wells-v-connable-mass-1885.