
    James B. Laing vs. O. T. Nelson.
    October 29, 1889.
    Bailee — Action against Trespasser. — The actual possession of personal property by a bailee is sufficient to sustain an acti on for an injury thereto by a mere trespasser.
    Appeal by defendant from an order of the municipal court of Min-neapolis, refusing a new trial upon the plaintiff consenting that the ■verdict of $50 in his favor be reduced to $35.
    
      Merrick é Merrick, for appellant.
    
      W. H. Adams, for respondent.
   Vanderburgh, J.

The evidence tends to show that the plaintiff, .a drayman, was loading furniture upon .his wagon in the street, and that defendant, who was driving rapidly, ran against the horse of the former, and caused his wagon to be overturned and the furniture injured. The jury were warranted in finding that the plaintiff was lawfully in possession of the goods, and that the injury was caused by the wrongful act of the defendant, which amounted to a trespass. .As against a mere wrong-doer, the plaintiff’s possession was sufficient to entitle him to maintain the action. Edw. Bailm. § 37; Orser v. Storms, 9 Cowen, 687, (18 Am. Dec. 548, and cases;) Chamberlain v. West, 37 Minn. 54, (33 N. W. Rep. 114.)

Order affirmed.  