PEET V. ROTH HOTEL CO.
253 N.W. 546 (1934)
NATURE OF THE CASE: This was a suit over liability for lost ring.
FACTS: Peet (P) had a ring that needed repair and gave it to the cashier at the Roth
Hotel (D) to give to a Mr. Hotz, a regular guest of the hotel to fix the ring. At trial the
cashier admitted that the ring had been delivered to her. It was also established that the
ring was immediately lost because it was inadvertently placed on her desk or counter and
within easy reach of anyone standing or passing by. P eventually discovered that Mr. Hotz
never received the ring and then sued D to recover its value. The verdict went to P and D
appealed; P failed to divulge the unusual value of her ring when it was left.
ISSUE:
RULE OF LAW:
HOLDING AND DECISION:
LEGAL ANALYSIS:
Get
free access to the entire content for Mac, PC or Online
for 2-3 days and free samples
of all kinds of products.
for 2-3 days and free samples of all kinds of products.
https://bsmsphd.com
© 2007-2016 Abn Study Partner
No comments:
Post a Comment