Case ID: scl_19/html/0399-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Johnson, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

H. Holcombe v. A. Townsend.
    Vide State v. Gay, ante p 364.
    To enable the plaintiff to maintain trover for goods, he must have either a general or special property in them, the actual possession* or the right of possession; but where the plaintiff had been employed by the defendant as a cropper, and was to receive one fourth of the crop for his services; Held, that no right of property in the crop .was vested in the tiff until partition, and that therefore, he could not maintain trover for his share of the crop, but that as-sumpsit was his remedy for a breach of the contract to deliver.
   Curia per

Johnson, J.

affirming the decision of Mr. Justice Evans, at Union, Fall Term, 1833.