50 So. 1033 | Ala. | 1909
This action is by the appellee against the appellants, the first count being in trespass and the second in trover, for the conversion of a horse. The only assignments of error insisted on relate to the giving of charge A at the request of the plaintiff, and the refusal to give certain charges requested by the defendants, unless remarks in the brief of appellants may be considered as insisting on error in overruling the exception to the question to the witness W. B. Walker, “What was Phil Walker worth?”
Phil Walker was one of the defendants, and the claim of plaintiff is that all of the defendants conspired to defraud him of his .horse, by having Phil Walker to come in and offer to give $245 for the Pitts note of $250, mailing the false statement that the father of Pitts was in town for the purpose of paying the note off; that the trade was not actually consummated, but that plaintiff only agreed to make the • trade of the horse for the notes provided said Phil Walker would pay the $245 in cash; and that they deceived him with this promise, until they got possession of' the horse, without his knowledge or consent. It was then, a material circumstance, in reaching a conclusion as to the facts and intention of the transaction, to 'show whether or not Phil Walker’s promise wa.s worth anything. The court erred in giving charge A on request of the plaintiff.
The judgment of the court is reversed, and the cause remanded.
Reversed and remanded.