Fairbanks v. Williams

The Court: This is an action to recover damages from defendant for forcibly taking and entering into the possession of certain property of plaintiff, and depriving plaintiff of the use, possession, and control thereof, from November 4th, 1879, until January 19th, 1880. »

The property is described in the complaint: “ One twenty-stamp quartz-mill, with the engines, hoisting works, tools, and all other machinery connected with said mill; also, three hundred and sixty-eight cords of firewood; also, sixty round timbers, each from twelve to fourteen feet long; also, twenty-five short timbers, each five to nine feet long; also, three hundred bushels, more or less, of charcoal; also, a blacksmith-shop and tools thereunto belonging”—all situated on a certain tract of land particularly described.

The Court below expressly found that there was no evidence of any wrongful design or willful misconduct tending to aggravate the trespass, and that plaintiff was not entitled to recover" exemplary or vindictive damages.

But as direct and proximate damages the Court found:

7- “ That the plaintiff necessarily paid, laid out, and expended two hundred and eighty-five dollars as fees and necessary traveling expenses of counsel for advising the [242]plaintiff in the premises and conducting the proceedings necessary on the part of the plaintiff in procuring the restoration of the possession of said property.

8. “ That the plaintiff necessarily paid to Frank J. Fairbanks the sum of five hundred and twenty-six dollars and thirty-eight cents as wages and traveling expenses in aiding the plaintiff in procuring the restoration of the possession of said property.”

It may be admitted (but is not here decided), that the record before us shows which of the articles of property alleged to have been detained, were personal property; and that such articles were converted.

Section 3333 of the Civil Code authorizes- a jury to find damages for the detriment proximately caused, and is, so far, declaratory of the common law. It leaves the question as to what are proximate damages where it was. The second subdivision of § 3336 of the same code permits a plaintiff in an action for the wrongful conversion of personal property to recover “a fair compensation for the time and money properly expended in the pursuit of the property.”