Bianchi v Nash
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 01 January 1836 |
| Date | 01 January 1836 |
| Court | Exchequer |
English Reports Citation: 150 E.R. 551
EXCH. OF PLEAS.
S. C. 1 Tyr. & G. 916; 5 L. J. Ex. 252. Referred to, Beverley v. Lincoln Gas Light and Coke Company, 1837, 6 A. & E. 836; 2 N. & P. 285; Iley v. Frankenstein, 1844, 8 Scott, N. R. 841.
[545] bianchi v. nash. Exch. of Pleas. 1836.-The plaintiff agreed to let (or lend) the defendant a musical snuff-box, on the understanding that if it were damaged, the defendant was to have it and pay for it; and 31. 10s. was to be taken as its value. The defendant received the box accordingly, and it was damaged while in his possession:-Held, that the plaintiff was entitled to maintain an action for goods sold and delivered to recover the 31. 10s. [S. C. 1 Tyr. & G. 916 ; 5 L. J. Ex. 252. Referred to, Beverley v. Lijicoln Gas Light and Coke Company, 1837, 6 A. & E. 836; 2 N. & P. 285; Iley v. Frankenstein, 1844, 8 Scott, N. K. 841.] Debt for goods sold and delivered. Plea, tiunquani indebitatus. At the trial, before the urider-sheriff of Middlesex, it appeared that the plaintiff was a dealer in musical snuff-boxes : that the defendant applied to him to let (or lend) him a musical EDuff-box, and the plaintiff agreed to clo so, on the understanding that the defendant was to have it and pay for it if it were damaged ; and the sum of 31. 10s. was to be taken as its value. The defendant received the snuff-box on this understanding; it was damaged while in his possession; and the plaintiff, in consequence, refused to receive it back, and brought this action for the price. The under-sheriff left it to the jury to say whether the agreement was, that, in the event of the box being damaged, it was to be a sale ; and they found that that was the agreement, and gave a verdict for the plaintiff, damages 31. 10s. F. V. Lee obtained a rule nisi for a new trial, on the ground that this was a mere bailment, which ought to have been declared on specially, and that there was no evidence to support the count for goods sold and delivered. Chandless shewed cause. It cannot be said, as matter of law, that there was no evidence to support the contract found by the jury ; it was altogether a question for their consideration what was the nature of the agreement, and they have found that it was, in the event which happened, a sale. There is no need of authorities to shew that in the case of a conditional sale, on the condition taking effect, it becomes an absolute sale. F. V. Lee, contra. It is submitted that there...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Beverley against The Lincoln Gas Light and Coke Company
...(Peake, N. P. C. 56), is, in this respect, not distinguishable. The principle of that case was expressly upheld in Bianchi v. Nash (1 M. & W. 545. Tyr. & Gr. 916); and Brooke v. White (1 N. E. 330), Swancott v. Westgarth (4 East, 75), and Harrison v. Allen (2 Bing. 4), are to the same affec......
-
Robert Floyd waters, Administrator of Edmound Waters, against The Earl of Thanet
...to Birks v. Trippet (\ Wrns. Saund. 33 a.), and with Nmtm v. Ellam (2 M. & W. 461). If the defendant had been (&)1 See Bianchi v. Nash, 1 M. & W. 545; S. C. Tyr. & Gr. 916; and the cases cited in Bewrley v. The Lincoln Gas Light and Coke Company, 6 A. & E. 829, 831, and in Scott v. Parker, ......
-
Hunter v Hunter, Executrix
...J. Ex. 333. Re RendallUNK 7 L. T. N. S. 289. Re RogersUNK 7 L. T. N. S. 510. Cooke v. HemmingELR L. R. 3 C. P. 334. Bianchi v. NashENRUNK 1 M. & W. 545; 5 L. J. Ex. 252. Stone v. RogersENRUNK 2 M. & W. 443; 6 L. J. Ex. 145. Corner v. ShewENRUNK 3 M & W. 350; 7 L. J. Ex. 105. Ford v. BeechUN......
-
Moss against Sweet and Another
...in Lyons v. Barnes (2 Stark. N. P. C. 39), and was decided after reference had been made to the opposite authorities of Bianchi v. Nash (1 M. & W. 545. Tyr. & G. 916), and Beverley v. The Lincoln Gas Light and Cc&e Company (6 A. & E. 829). Patteson J. The jury having found as a fact that th......