Case ID: ohio-law-abs_1/html/0685-03.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "HUGHES, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

No 702
    EVERETT and SULLIVAN v. FARMERS BANK CO.
    Ohio Appeals 3d District, Crawford County
    ^.0,
    Decided Feb. 8, 1923
    This opinion has not been published except in Abstract.
    110. CONVERSION.
    Measure of damages — Bonds stolen from alleged bailee — Evidence establishes bank as bailee.
    Attorneys — C. Gallirgfi, for Everett and Sullivan; D. M.- Bailey, B. Meek. C. A. Meek, for Farmers Bank Co.
   HUGHES, J.

Epitomized Opinion

This is an action for conversion. The opinion does not give the facts giving rise to the alleged conversion. It seems that bonds were stoien xrom the bank as alleged bailee. Reversal is asked on the ground that the evidence does not establish a relationship of bailee and bailor, that recovery should have been limited to the interest of the bailee and the property converted, and that only heresay evidence established the amount of the bonds stolen from the bank. In reversing the judgment the Court of Appeals held;

1. It was prejudicial error to allow proof of the amount of the bonds stolen by hearsay evidence entirely.

2. A bailee may re over the full value of prep-erty converted. For the conversion of money securities such as bonds, notes, etc., the owner is prima facie entitled to their face value. Either party may show the actual market value to increase cr decrease the damages.

3. The evidence establishes the bank as bailee under the decisions of 113 Atl. 681; 190 Pac. 946, and 95 N. E. 973.