Legal Opinion

W. W. Bierce Ltd. v. Hutchins

Hawaii Supreme Court

Decided April 29, 1905PublishedCited by 3 opinions

Petition roe Rehearing.

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION OF THE COURT BY

FREAR, C.J.

This is a petition for a rehearing of the case decided ante, page 118. The action is replevin for rails, cars, etc., claimed to have been sold by the plaintiff on the condition that title should remain in it until payment. The court held that even if title were to remain in the plaintiff until payment still the plaintiff could not maintain replevin, which is based on the theory that the title was in it, for the reason that it had pre viously elected an inconsistent right by bringing an action for the price and to enforce a materialman’s lien, which was based,…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Snow v. AlleyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1892
  2. Johnson-Brinkman Commission Co. v. Missouri Pacific Railway Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1895
  3. Clausen v. HeadWisconsin Supreme Court · 1901
  4. Hickman v. RichburgSupreme Court of Alabama · 1898
  5. Canadian Typograph Co. v. MacgurnMichigan Supreme Court · 1899

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. William W. Bierce, Ltd. v. WaterhouseSupreme Court of the United States · 1911
  2. William W. Bierce, Ltd. v. HutchinsHawaii Supreme Court · 1907
  3. William W. Bierce, Ltd. v. WaterhouseHawaii Supreme Court · 1909

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API