Opinion

Osgood v. Nichols

  • 71 Mass. 420
Court
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Filed
Nov 15, 1855
Status
Published
Author
Metcalf
On the bench
Metcalf
Cited by
0 cases
Authority
More cited than 10.0%

The opinion

Metcalf, J.

We are of opinion that the evidence, which the defendant offered at the trial, was not admissible, either as a defence to the action or in reduction of damages. The goods were entrusted to him for sale, as an auctioneer, and he received and sold them in that capacity. He made no claim on them as his property, until he was called upon for the proceeds of the sale. And it neither appears, nor is suggested, that he acted, in the sale, under any ignorance or misapprehension of his own rights. If the goods were his, he purposely misled the plaintiff, and is estopped to make the defence which he now offers. Dewey v. Field, 4 Met. 381 . Cox v. Buck, 3 Strob. 367 . Brown v. Wheeler, 17 Conn. 345 . Strong v. Ellsworth, 26 Verm. 373 . Hawes v. Watson, 2 B. & C. 540. 2 Smith’s Lead. Cas. (3d Amer. ed.) 531 & seq.

Exceptions overruled.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.