Shines v. Steiner
Supreme Court of Alabama
Appeal from the City Court of Montgomery. Tried before the lion. Tiros. M. Arrington. This action was brought by Emanuel Shines, against Victor Steiner and M. Steiner.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the City Court of Montgomery. Tried before the lion. Tiros. M. Arrington. This action was brought by Emanuel Shines, against Victor Steiner and M. Steiner. The complaint contained a single count, in these words: “The plaintiff claims of the defendants one thousand dollars as damages, for this : that said plaintiff was, on, to-wit, the 15th December, 1883, in the city of Montgomery, in possession and the owner of one bale of lint cotton,” the weight, quality and value of which were specified ; “and said defendants then and there contrived and undertook to cheat and defraud…
1Opinion of the CourtOlopton, J.
— The sole cause of demurrer assigned is, that the complaint is in form an action on the case, and the facts averred show that the form of action should be assumpsit.
Where there is a sale of goods, to be paid for by cash on delivery, payment and delivery are concurrent acts. In such ease, payment is a condition precedent to passing title to the vendee. If delivery is made without demanding payment, or under circumstances showing no expectation of immediate payment, the condition is waived, and the title passes; but, if the goods are put into the possession of the buyer, on the understanding…
2Cited by16 opinions
- Eaton v. StateAlabama Court of Appeals · 1918
- Pollak v. WinterSupreme Court of Alabama · 1911
- Cook & Co. v. Malone & SonsSupreme Court of Alabama · 1900
- Masoner v. BellSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1908
- Moore v. LongSupreme Court of Alabama · 1947
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.