Rosum v. Hodges

Citations

• 1 S.D. 308
• 9 L.R.A. 817

Syllabus

<p>1. A party has no right to cross-examine'a witness except as to the facts and circumstances connected with the matters stated in his direct examination.</p> <p>2. Whether, under Section 4603, Comp. Laws, providing- that “ the detriment caused by the wrongful conversion of personal property is presumed to be (1) the value of the property at the time of the conversion, with the interest from that time, or (2) where the action has been prosecuted with reasonable diligence, the highest market value of the property at any time between the conversion and the verdict, without interest, at the option of the injured party,” etc., the plaintiff must he held to have elected to have his damages assessed under the first rule, by demanding in his complaint interest on the value of the property alleged to have been converted, is not decided; but where in such case the defendant ha's, without objection, admitted plaintiff’s evidence going directly and specifically to the highest market value, such evidence being- the only testimony as to damages, nothing occurring- during the entire trial to suggest to the court that defendant disputes plaintiff’s right to such measure, the court is justified in assuming- that both parties agree to that rule of damages, and in instructing the jury accordingly.</p> <p>3. Where personal property is taken* from the true owner tortiously, and by the wrong-door sold to an innocent purchaser, the true owner, having been guilty of no wrong or negligence, may maintain an action for the recovery of the property or its value without previous demand.</p> <p>(Syllabus by the Court.</p>