John Gill & Sons v. Kahl-Holt Co.
Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
Hkarixo on an appeal by two defendants from a judgment of the Supreme Court of the District of Columbia, on verdict, in an action of replevin.
Read the full summary
Hkarixo on an appeal by two defendants from a judgment of the Supreme Court of the District of Columbia, on verdict, in an action of replevin. The Court in tbe opinion stated the facts as follows: This appeal [by John Gill & Sons, a corporation, and W. G'. Cornell Company, a corporation] is from a judgment in tlie supremo court of the District for the appellee, the ICahl-IIolt Company, a corporation, plaintiff below, sustaining its claim of title, under an unrecorded conditional sale agreement, to certain material furnished by it to a subcontractor. The appellant W. G. Cornell Company was the…
1Opinion of the Court
Mr. Justiee Robb
delivered the opinion of the Court:
It is not denied that the agreement between appellee and Bevans was legal and valid as between them. By failing to have that agreement reduced to writing and recorded, appellee *57merely assumed tlio risk that a legal wrong, within the meaning of the statute, might be inflicted upon third parties, in other words, appellants’ rights are dependent upon and measured by the statute; and since this statute restricts the rights of property by regulating its use, its scope may not be broadened by construction. Woolley v. Genera Wagon Co. 59 N. J. L.…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Fosdick v. SchallSupreme Court of the United States · 1879
- Myer v. Car Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1880
- Woolley v. Geneva Wagon Co.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1896
3Cited by2 opinions
- Stern Co. of Washington, Inc. v. RosenbergDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 1937
- Hobart Mfg. Co. v. VozeolasDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1969