Severin v Keppell
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 18 January 1803 |
| Date | 18 January 1803 |
| Court | High Court |
English Reports Citation: 170 E.R. 674
IN THE COURTS OF KING'S BENCH AND COMMON PLEAS.
June 3d. severin v. keppell (When goods are delivered under a contract, as to do something with them, and to deliver them according to the party's undertaking, and omission of the party's doing what he so undertook to do, will not sustain an action of trover, unless there has been an actual refusal to redehver.) This was an action of trover, for several articles of plate and plated goods, stated in the declaration. The defendant was a silversmith ; and they had been delivered to him for the purpose of putting glasses into them. He had been applied to, on many occasions, for the articles so delivered to him ; he made excuses, and said, the. glass was not come from the glass-blower's : there was no denial at any time to deliver the goods, but rather excuses for not delivering them : however, in one instance, the defendant admitted that the glass was come home ; but he then said, his wife was out, and he could not deliver them. He afterwards delivered the plated glass, and said he had sent the silver ones home; whieh was not true. 4 ESP. iff?. BROWN V. ALLEN 675 It was objected by the defendant's counsel, that [157] on the evidence given, there was no conversion sufficient to support the action of trover Erskine, for the plaintiff, contended, That the defendant having in the last instance, admitted his possession of the goods, and having made a frivolous and false pretence for not delivering the articles, after his repeated excuses before made, that it was evidence of conversion sufficient to go to the ]ury , particularly from the circumstance of his having returned the plated goods, and pretended to have sent...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Cullen, Allen & Company v Barclay
...Before SULLIVAN, M. R., DEASY and FITZ GIBBON, L.JJ. CULLEN, ALLEN & CO. and BARCLAY. Severin v. KeppellENR 4 Esp. 156. Ross v. JohnsonENR 5 Burr. 2825. Clements v. FlightENR 16 M. & W. 42. Gledstane v. HewittENR 1 Cr. & J. 565. Jones v. DowleENR 9 M. & W. 19. Colegrave v. Dias Santos 2 B. ......