Case ID: ill-app_184/html/0620-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Mr. Justice Gridley", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Michael Davranges, Defendant in Error, v. Peter Olff et al., Plaintiffs in Error.
    Gen. No. 18,725.
    (Not to be reported in full.)
    Abstract of the Decision.
    Trover and conversion, § 39
      
      —when evidence sufficient to sustain recovery against livery stable Keeper for conversion. Livery stable keepers refused to deliver certain horses, wagons and harness to the owner thereof on demand after a certain sum was tendered for board and keep. The stable keepers claimed that the owner owed them a greater amount than the sum tendered and that they had traded a horse for one of the horses and a certain sum additional. Held in an action of replevin, which action was changed to trover, upon the trial, that a judgment in favor of plaintiff was sustained by the evidence, the jury having returned special findings that there had been no horse trade and that the sum tendered was the amount owing the defendants.
    Error to the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Oscab M. Tobbison, Judge, presiding.
    Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the October term, 1912.
    Affirmed.
    Opinion filed January 22, 1914.
    Statement of the Case.
    Action by Michael Davranges against Peter Olff, Samuel B. Olff and Arthur Olff, trading as Peter Olff & Sons, in replevin to recover possession of two horses, two wagons and two sets of harness, which were kept in defendant’s livery stable. Upon the trial plaintiff was given leave to change the form of action to trover and filed a count in trover. From a judgment in favor of plaintiff for four hundred and sixty-five dollars, defendants bring error.
    Adolph Marks, for plaintiffs in error.
    Andrew E. Lindas, for defendant in error.
    
      
      See Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, same topic and section number.
    
   Mr. Justice Gridley

delivered the opinion of the court.