TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Clute v. Wiggins

Clute against Wiggins

Clute v. Wiggins, 14 Johns. 175 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1817)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
New York Supreme Court · State Trial Courts
Decided
May 15, 1817
Citations
14 Johns. 175
Headnotes
Inakeepefca asr&* chargeable fot? the goods tbeir guest»' or stolen»/ tbeir f° |, %¡f £*/ g| Pf i j?nn. where loads of that description r?ep© uc&dly received, an¿ the grain was stolea during the./ Scsper ms hela responsible for the loas. ,
Summary
IN ERROR, on certiorari to a justice’s court. Wiggins, B waggoner, brought an action on the case against Clute, a tavern-keeper, to recover the value of several bags of wheat and bar pi» ley, stolen from the sleigh of the plaintiff during the night, while he was entertained as a guest in the house of the defendant. At the trial before the justice, it was proved that the defendant kept a tavern, in the town of Half Moon $ that the plaintiff same to the defendant’s house, with a load of wheat and barley and was there received as a guest for the night; that his horses —Pn/i-n," o v/ere put into the plámtíff^s sta e, and his sleigh, with the wheat and barley, “ was put into the waggon-house of the plaintiff where it had teen usual for the defendant to receive loads of that description.” The next morning it was discovered that the. dollars, with costs. door of the waggon-house had t^epn broken open, and all the 0-t

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

Per Curiam.

The liability of an inn-keeper for such losses, arises from the nature of his employment. He has privileges by special license. He holds out a general invitation to all travellers to come to his house, and he receives a reward for his hospitality. The law, in return, impo'ses on him corresponding duties, one of which is, to protect the property of those whom xhe receives as guests.

*177 On general principles applicable to this subject, the defendant is liable for the loss sustained in this case. He received the plaintiff as his guest, for the night, with his loaded sleigh and horses. The sleigh with its contents was put into an out~ house appurtenant to the inn, "where it had been usual for the defendant to receive loads of that description." The doors of this waggon-house were broken open, from which it may be inferred that the building was close, and the doors fastened in such a manner as to promise security. The bags of grain, therefore, may be deemed to have been infra hospaium; and being so, it is not necessary to prove negligence in the inn~ keeper, to make him liable for the loss. (Cayle's Case, 8 Co. 32. Bennet v. 1Uill~r, 5 Term Rep. 273.)

Judgment below affirmed.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

Cited by 18 cases

View all citing references →
1836–1837: 11842–1843: 11848–1849: 11850–1851: 11860–1861: 11864–1865: 21866–1867: 21868–1869: 11872–1873: 11888–1889: 11898–1899: 11900–1901: 11910–1911: 11936–1937: 11944–1945: 11970–1971: 118362026peak 1864 · 2

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Merchants Fire Assur. Corp. of New York v. Zion's Securities Corp.163 P.2d 319 (Utah 1945) · Concurrence
  2. Lader v. Warsher165 Misc. 559 (1937)
  3. Hulett v. Swift33 N.Y. 571 (1865)
  4. Pinkerton v. Woodward33 Cal. 557 (1867)
  5. Norcross v. Norcross53 Me. 163 (1865)
  6. McDonald v. Edgerton5 Barb. 560 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1849)

Most recent

  1. Buck v. HANKIN269 A.2d 344 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1970)
  2. Merchants Fire Assur. Corp. of New York v. Zion's Securities Corp.163 P.2d 319 (Utah 1945) · Concurrence
  3. Lader v. Warsher165 Misc. 559 (1937)
  4. Ticehurst v. Beinbrink72 Misc. 365 (1911)
  5. Bradley Livery Co. v. Snook55 L.R.A. 208 (N.J. 1901)
  6. Cohen v. Manuel40 L.R.A. 491 (Me. 1898)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list