Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

14 Johns. 175

Clute v. Wiggins

New York Supreme Court

Decided May 15, 1817

New York Supreme Court · decided 1817-05-15

IN ERROR, on certiorari to a justice’s court. Wiggins, B waggoner, brought an action on the case against Clute, a tavern-keeper, to recover the value of several bags of wheat and bar pi» ley, stolen from the sleigh of the plaintiff during the night, while he was entertained as a guest in the house of the defendant.

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1817-05-15

How this case has been cited

Cited by 10 later decisions — most recently November 1945

10 state decisions

1018171820183018401850186018701880189019001910192019301940decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Per Curiam.

¶1The liability of an inn-keeper for such losses, arises from the nature of his employment. He has privileges by special license. He holds out a general invitation to all travellers to come to his house, and he receives a reward for his hospitality. The law, in return, impo'ses on him corresponding duties, one of which is, to protect the property of those whom xhe receives as guests.

¶2*177On general principles applicable to this subject, the defendant is liable for the loss sustained in this case. He received the plaintiff as his guest, for the night, with his loaded sleigh and horses. The sleigh with its contents was put into an out~ house appurtenant to the inn, "where it had been usual for the defendant to receive loads of that description." The doors of this waggon-house were broken open, from which it may be inferred that the building was close, and the doors fastened in such a manner as to promise security. The bags of grain, therefore, may be deemed to have been infra hospaium; and being so, it is not necessary to prove negligence in the inn~ keeper, to make him liable for the loss. (Cayle's Case, 8 Co. 32. Bennet v. 1Uill~r, 5 Term Rep. 273.)

¶3Judgment below affirmed.

/14/johns/175 · .json · Public domain