STATE V. RIGGINS 8 Ill. 2d 78, 132 N.E.2d 519 (1956) CASE BRIEF

STATE V. RIGGINS

8 Ill. 2d 78, 132 N.E.2d 519 (1956)

NATURE OF THE CASE: Riggins (D) appealed from the Circuit Court where he was convicted of embezzlement in violation of Ill. Rev. Stat. 1953, ch. 38, par. 210.

FACTS: D was the owner and operator of a collection agency. D called on Dorothy Tarrant and asked to collect her firm's delinquent accounts. D and Tarrant reached an oral agreement whereby D was to undertake the collections. D was to receive one third on city accounts and one half on out-of-city accounts. It was agreed that D need not account for the amounts collected until a bill was paid in full, at which time he was to remit by check. D was to be liable for court costs in the event he chose to file suit on any of the accounts, but the first money collected was to be applied to those costs. If no collection was made, D was to stand the loss. Tarrant exercised no control over D as to the time or manner of collecting the accounts, and with her knowledge he commingled funds collected for all his clients in a single bank account. He also used this as a personal account. Tarrant became aware that D had collected several accounts for her in full, but had not accounted to her. D promised to account but did not. Tarrant also discovered more accounts. D then filed a bankruptcy petition listing Cooper's Jewelry and Music, among others, as a creditor. Tarrant preferred the charges against D and D was indicted for embezzlement. D was convicted. D appealed.

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.

https://bsmsphd.com

© 2007-2016 Abn Study Partner