Trotter v. M'Afee
Supreme Court of Alabama
Assumpsit in the Circuit Court of Lawrence county, by M‘Afee against Trotter and JYPGonnegal. Verdict and judgement for the plaintiff. On the trial it was proved, that the plaintiff had contracted with defendants for the sale of his crop of cotton, to be delivered at the gin of one Peters, who was authorized by them to receive it, and was furnished by them with bagging andirope, for the purpose of having it baled and prepared for’market.
Read the full summary
Assumpsit in the Circuit Court of Lawrence county, by M‘Afee against Trotter and JYPGonnegal. Verdict and judgement for the plaintiff. On the trial it was proved, that the plaintiff had contracted with defendants for the sale of his crop of cotton, to be delivered at the gin of one Peters, who was authorized by them to receive it, and was furnished by them with bagging andirope, for the purpose of having it baled and prepared for’market. After a part of the cotton had been delivered, one of the defendants was at the gin and instructed Peters to bale the cotton as soon as he could$ and a short…
1Opinion of the Court
THE CHIEF JUSTICE
delivered the opinion of the Court.
There is some difficulty in coming to a satisfactory conclusion, as to the point of time when the contract was executed, and the plaintiff having taken the receipt in his own name, has contributed much to embarrass, the question. The statute authorizes the transfer of cotton receipts, and imposes heavy penalties on gin holders for not delivering cotton to the legal holder of such receipts.a But if the contract was complete on the delivery of the cotton in question, the receipt could not control it. The gin holder had notice of the contract,…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Dildine v. DildineNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1880
- Executors of Burnet v. BurnetNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1879