Case ID: ohio-law-abs_4/html/0788-20.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "ROBINSON, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

No. 1018
    No. 19732
    No. 19733
    No. 19734
    State of Ohio v. Herbert I. Channer. State of Ohio v. Geo. A. Sawyer. State of Ohio v. Fred G. McLaughlin.
    Error to the Court of Appeals of Hamilton County.
    362. DEBTOR AND CREDITOR — Where a person is employed by another and has stock come into his possession belonging to such other, having loaned money to the owner of the_ stocks, and such stocks are held on security for the loan, the relationship is not that of principal and agent but of debtor and creditor.
    1235. VERDICTS — Where no proof is offered to support an essential averment of an indictment charging embezzlement, motion for directed verdict in favor of defendant should be sustained.
   ROBINSON, J.

1. An indictment which charges B. with embezzling shares of stock, the personal property of A., coming into the possession of B. by virtue of his employment as agent by A., is not supported by proof that A. borrowed money of B. and as a part of that transaction delivered the stock to B. as collateral security for the loan and that B. converted the stock to his own use, the relationship created by the transaction proven being not that of principal and agent hut that of debtor and creditor, pledgor and pledgee, bailor and bailee.

2. Where the State has offered no proof tending^ to support an essential averment of the indictment and a motion has been made at the close of the State's case to direct a verdict for the defendant, it is the duty of the trial court to sustain such motion.

Judgments reversed.

Marshall, CJ., Jones, Matthias and Kinkade, JJ., concur.