Legal Opinion

Security Bank of Minnesota v. Minneapolis Cold Storage Co.

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided October 20, 1893No. 8437PublishedCited by 3 opinions

Appeal by plaintiff, tbe Security Bank of Minnesota, from an order of tbe District Court of Hennepin County, Robert D. Russellr J., made August 26,1893, denying its motion for a new trial. On November 27,1892, tbe defendant, tbe Minneapolis Cold Storage Company, a corporation, contracted with J. W. Stevens & Co. to receive and store 640 barrels of apples valued at $1,280 at its cold storage warehouse No. 69 Nicollet Street on Nicollet Island, Minneapolis.

Read the full summary

Appeal by plaintiff, tbe Security Bank of Minnesota, from an order of tbe District Court of Hennepin County, Robert D. Russellr J., made August 26,1893, denying its motion for a new trial. On November 27,1892, tbe defendant, tbe Minneapolis Cold Storage Company, a corporation, contracted with J. W. Stevens & Co. to receive and store 640 barrels of apples valued at $1,280 at its cold storage warehouse No. 69 Nicollet Street on Nicollet Island, Minneapolis. Tbe apples were about to arrive by tbe Chicago, M. & St. P. By. Co. and defendant agreed to advance and pay tbe freight,. $566.78, and…

1Opinion of the CourtMitchell, J.

1878 G. S. ch. 124, § 17, does not make bills of lading and warehouse receipts “negotiable,” in the proper sense of the term, or put them on the footing of promissory notes and hills of exchange, but was intended merely to prescribe the mode of transferring or assigning such instruments, and to provide that their transfer should, for certain purposes, be equivalent to an actual transfer and delivery of the property itself. National Bank of Commerce v, Chicago, B. & N. Ry. Co., 44 Minn. 224-236, (46 N. W. Rep. 342, 560.) Hence, if defendant is prevented from asserting, as against plaintiff,,…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. National Bank of Commerce v. Chicago, Burlington & Northern RailroadSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1890
  2. Stein v. RheinstromSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1891

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Scott v. HaySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1903
  2. Ammon v. Gamble-Robinson Commission Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1910
  3. Boas v. De Pue Warehouse Co.California Court of Appeal · 1924

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

Powered by the Exa API