Mulford v. People

Citations

• 139 Ill. 586
• 28 N.E. 1096
• 1891 Ill. LEXIS 1247

Syllabus

<p>1. Embezzlement—deposit of money by employe with employer—relation between them. An agent employed to attend to sales of a patent •coffee-pot, deposited with his employer $50 as security for his performance of the duties of his employment for one month, there being no intention that the deposit should be kept separate from the other funds •of the employer. Before the time of the service had expired the employe demanded a return of the money so deposited, which was refused ■until another person could be found to take his place: Held, that the •deposit created between the parties merely the relation of debtor and •creditor, and not that of bailor or bailee, and that the subsequent refusal of the employer to repay the money deposited, on demand, could not constitute embezzlement or larceny. It could be nothing more ■than a failure to pay a debt.</p> <p>2. Deposit of money with employer as security—rights of employer. If a party deposits money with his employer as security for •his faithful discharge of the duties of his employment, he will not be ■entitled to have the same returned to him before he completes the term of his service. The employer may retain the same as security for any loss or damages he may sustain by the failure of the depositor to perform his entire contract.</p>