Case ID: ny_248/html/0589-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

John Laughlin, Respondent, v. August F. Meyer, Defendant, and Herbert A. Meyer, Appellant.
    
      Conversion — action for conversion of oil paintings — sufficiency of demand and refusal.
    
    
      Laughlin v. Meyer, 222 App. Div. 793, affirmed.
    (Submitted May 10, 1928;
    decided May 29, 1928.)
    Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the fourth judicial department, entered January 9, 1928, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict. The action was to recover for the alleged conversion of certain oil paintings. The defense was that the pictures had come lawfully into the possession of defendants and that there was no sufficient demand and refusal to sustain an action for conversion.
    
      Noel E. Coshway and Andrew T. Beasley for appellant.
    
      Irving W. Cole for respondent.
   Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion.

Concur: Cardozo, Ch. J., Pound, Crane, Andrews, Lehman, Kellogg and O’Brien, JJ.