Fairbanks v. Richardson Drug Co.
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from the St. Louis City Circuit Court. — Hon. Daniel D. Fisher, Judge. Plaintiffs cannot recover, because this is a case of the sale of a chattel not yet delivered or accepted, the title to which was in plaintiffs at the time of the fire. Swallow v. Emery, 111 Mass. 355 ; Randle v. Stone, 77 Ga. 501; Thurston v. Ins. Co., 17 Fed. Rep. 127; Graves v. Roane, 11 N. J.. Eq. 96; Story on Sales [4 Ed.] sec. 233 ; Appleby v. Meyers, 2 Com. PI.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the St. Louis City Circuit Court. — Hon. Daniel D. Fisher, Judge. Plaintiffs cannot recover, because this is a case of the sale of a chattel not yet delivered or accepted, the title to which was in plaintiffs at the time of the fire. Swallow v. Emery, 111 Mass. 355 ; Randle v. Stone, 77 Ga. 501; Thurston v. Ins. Co., 17 Fed. Rep. 127; Graves v. Roane, 11 N. J.. Eq. 96; Story on Sales [4 Ed.] sec. 233 ; Appleby v. Meyers, 2 Com. PI. L. R. 650; Esehberger v. Miller, 20 Md. 332; Brumby v. Smith, 3 Ala. 123; Pierce v. Cooley, 56 Mich. 552; Carter v. Wallace, 35 Hun. 189 ; Hunt v.…
1Opinion of the CourtThompson, J.
This action is brought to recover the reasonable value of certain goods and materials alleged to have been sold, and of certain work and labor alleged to have been done by the plaintiffs at the special instance and request of defendant. There is a second count in the petition which we do not think it necessary to consider, because the decision of the case must depend upon an application of the law to an undisputed state of facts.1 The defendant pleaded, and the plaintiffs by reply admitted that, on the tenth day of December, 1888, the plaintiffs and the defendant entered into a special…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Cook v. McCabeWisconsin Supreme Court · 1881
- Cleary v. SohierMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1876
- Hollis v. ChapmanTexas Supreme Court · 1872
- Haynes, Spencer & Co. v. Second Baptist ChurchSupreme Court of Missouri · 1885
- Rawson v. ClarkIllinois Supreme Court · 1873
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Brooks v. TynerSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1913
- Ogle v. Oklahoma City Horse & Mule Com. Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1935
- R. H. Thomas Co. v. LewisWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1916
- Massey-Harris Co. v. QuickMissouri Court of Appeals · 1931
- Chicago Edison Co. v. Huyett & Smith Manufacturing Co.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1896