Edgewood Distilling Co. v. Shannon
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Garland Circuit Court. Alexander M. Dueeie, Judge. STATEMENT BY THE COURT. The appellant sued S. P. Teatro & Co. for a debt of over nineteen hundred dollars, and had an attachment issued and levied upon a stock of liquors, bar fixtures and furniture in the possession of Teatro & Co. Judgment for the debt and sustaining the attachment was rendered in favor of the appellant. Shannon, the appellee, filed an interplea for the fixtures and furniture.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Garland Circuit Court. Alexander M. Dueeie, Judge. STATEMENT BY THE COURT. The appellant sued S. P. Teatro & Co. for a debt of over nineteen hundred dollars, and had an attachment issued and levied upon a stock of liquors, bar fixtures and furniture in the possession of Teatro & Co. Judgment for the debt and sustaining the attachment was rendered in favor of the appellant. Shannon, the appellee, filed an interplea for the fixtures and furniture. His interplea was sustained by the jury, and judgment entered accordingly, from which this appeal was taken. On the 10th of January,…
1Opinion of the Court
Wood, J.,
1. sale construed to "be conditional, (after stating the facts.) True, the int . strument evidencing the contract between the parties expresses that the property is “bargained, sold and delivered,” but this is coupled with the condition “that if the said S. P. Teatro shall pay said Thomas Shannon the said note at the time herein specified, then this bill of sale is to be valid; otherwise void.” This condition clearly characterizes the transaction, we think, as a conditional sale. The payment of the twenty-one hundred dollar note was therefore a condition precedent to passing the…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Bailey v. HerveyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1883
- McIntosh v. HillSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1886
- McRea v. MerrifieldSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1886
- Simpson v. ShackelfordSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1886
- Carroll v. WigginsSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1875
3Cited by7 opinions
- McDonald Automobile Co. v. BicknellTennessee Supreme Court · 1914
- Thornton v. FindleySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1911
- Triplett v. Mansur & Tebbetts Implement Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1900
- Garrett v. John V. Farwell Co.Illinois Supreme Court · 1902
- Bryant v. KenyonMichigan Supreme Court · 1900
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.