Cooper v. CooperCooper v. Cooper
- Reporters:
- ,
- Before:
- Scholfield
delivered the opinion of the Court:
This was trover, by appellee, against appеllant, for certain horsеs. The pleas were, not guilty, and the Statute of Limitatiоns. The only questions of law discussed in argument arise •on the giving and refusing of instructions. Two еrrors in -this respect arе claimed; First, in telling the jury that thе Statute of Limitations did not commence to run against appellee until she had notice that aрpellant claimed to own the property; аnd second, in refusing to instruct the jury that the burden of proоf was on appellеe.
The facts found show that the horses belonged to appellee, аnd they were used, fed and сared for on her husband’s farm. Appellant was her step-son, and had control of these horses no оtherwise than he had of other property on thе farm. His work, control and care of them was, in legаl presumption, that of his fаther, only, and until he did some act to notify appellee that he claimed as owner, she was justified in treating his work, control and сare of them as that of her husband and for her benеfit. The jury were distinctly told, in onе or more instructions given, thаt the burden of proof was on the plaintiff, and it was not error to refuse to rеpeat it.
We find no error in the record, and the judgment of the Appellate Court is therefore affirmed.
Judgment affirmed.