Fourth National Bank v. St. Louis Cotton Compress Co.
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from the St. Louis Circuit Court, Adams, J. So long as the seller may insist on payment concurrently with delivery he has his lien ; and this he may always do unless he has agreed to the contrary.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the St. Louis Circuit Court, Adams, J. So long as the seller may insist on payment concurrently with delivery he has his lien ; and this he may always do unless he has agreed to the contrary. The seller retains his lien until he “ utterly relinquishes his possession.” — Story on Sales (4th ed.), sect. 283. Marking, boxing, or setting the goods aside does not destroy his lien. —Id., sect. 287 ; Benj. on Sales (2d Am. ed.), sect. 807., So, if possession is only surrendered for a special purpose, even to the buyer himself, the lien is not gone. — Story on Sales, sect. 292; Benj. on…
1Opinion of the CourtBakewell, J.
This is an action of replevin to recover possession of thirty-nine bales of cotton. Plaintiff, on making demand of the compress company, was informed by it that the cotton had been already taken from its possession by defendants Senter & Co., under a writ of replevin, and that the company held the cotton for that firm. On the institution of this suit, Senter & Co. gave bond, and retained the cotton. There was a verdict and judgment for plaintiff.
Plaintiff is a corporation doing a general banking business in the city of St. Louis. The defendant corporation conducts a public warehouse in the…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- St. Louis National Bank v. RossMissouri Court of Appeals · 1880
- Ditson v. RandallSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1851
3Cited by4 opinions
- Conrad v. FisherMissouri Court of Appeals · 1889
- Alabama State Bank v. BarnesSupreme Court of Alabama · 1886
- State Bank v. WaterhouseSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1897
- Northrop v. First National BankAppellate Court of Illinois · 1888