John Wooster & Co. v. Blossom
Supreme Court of North Carolina
ActioN of assumpsit, tried before PersoN, J., at a special term (January, 1858) of New-I!anbver Superior Court. Mr. Amringe, a broker, testified, that in (he month of February, 1858, acting in the character of an agent for the plaintiffs, lie sold to the defendant 1500 barrels of rosin, then lying at the plaintiffs’ wharf, in the town of "Wilmington, and that the rosin was to remain at their wharf for ten days, free •of wharfage, and after that time at the rate of one cent…
Read the full summary
ActioN of assumpsit, tried before PersoN, J., at a special term (January, 1858) of New-I!anbver Superior Court. Mr. Amringe, a broker, testified, that in (he month of February, 1858, acting in the character of an agent for the plaintiffs, lie sold to the defendant 1500 barrels of rosin, then lying at the plaintiffs’ wharf, in the town of "Wilmington, and that the rosin was to remain at their wharf for ten days, free •of wharfage, and after that time at the rate of one cent per barrel per week for the first week, and a half a cent per week afterwards. In this transaction the defendant…
1Opinion of the CourtPearson, J.
Tlie question 'is somewhat complicated by the fact, that the plaintiff was the owner of the wharf, and also of the rosin. Divest it of that circumstance, and it is a plain one. A wharfinger lias a -double remedy for his wharf-age : a lien on the article, and a “ personal lien” or claim on the owner. If the owner sells and a “ delivery order” is handed to the wharfinger, with a tender of the wharfage, there is no farther claim on the vendor, and the personal lien attaches to the vendee, on the ground that the wharfinger is no longer liable to the vendor for the safe-keeping of the article, and…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Riddick v. . DunnSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1907