Hendler v. Perkins

Citations

• 4 Pa. Super. 344
• 1897 Pa. Super. LEXIS 124

Syllabus

<p>Replevin for lost chattels — Defenses—Question for jury.</p> <p>Where the evidence, although conflicting, tends to show that the owner of lost property had told the finders to care for the same until he called and paid them a sum demanded for rescuing said property from a flood, the consideration, being past services and future care to be performed until the property was removed and settlement made, is sufficient to sustain a contractual lien and the alleged contract-being denied the question was for the jury. The defendant’s story being believed constituted a defense to an action of replevin brought by the owner.</p> <p>Lien — Lost property — Finder has no lien for labor or expenses.</p> <p>The finder of lost property is not entitled to alien where no reward is offered, and it is doubtful whether a finder of lost property can recover for expenses and labor voluntarily bestowed upon the thing found.</p>