Smith v. Fligel 185 Ill. App. 359

Thomas Smith, Defendant in Error, v. Martin Fligel, Plaintiff in Error.

Gen. No. 19,174.

(Not to he reported in full.)

Error to the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Joseph P. Rattebty, Judge, presiding.

Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the March term, 1913.

Reversed.

Opinion filed March 10, 1914.

Statement of the Case.

Action by Thomas Smith against Martin Fligel to recover the value of lumber wrongfully converted. From a judgment for plaintiff for fifty dollars, defendant brings error.

*360Abstract of the Decision.

Bailment, § 10 * —when gratuitous bailee not liable. In an action for the conversion of lumber placed by plaintiff on the property of defendant, with the latter’s consent, there being no evidence to show that any of the lumber was taken by defendant, it was held that defendant was merely a gratuitous bailee, and, in the absence of evidence of gross negligence on his part, was not liable.

Blum & Blum, for plaintiff in error.

Harry Brown, for defendant in error.