O'Neil v. Garrett
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from the Des Moines District Court. This is an action of replevin to recover the possession of five barrels of ale, commenced before a justice of the peace, and appealed to the', district court. The defendant claimed to hold the property as sheriff of Des Moines county under, and by virtue of, certain writs of attachment in his hands, against one Holmes.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Des Moines District Court. This is an action of replevin to recover the possession of five barrels of ale, commenced before a justice of the peace, and appealed to the', district court. The defendant claimed to hold the property as sheriff of Des Moines county under, and by virtue of, certain writs of attachment in his hands, against one Holmes. On the trial of the cause before a jury, the plaintiff proved that one J. J. Holmes purchased the ale in controversy, of plaintiff, on credit; that Holmes became insolvent before the arrival of the ale at East Burlington, the terminus…
1Opinion of the Court
Stockton, J\
— The vendor’s right of stoppage in transitu continues until the goods have reached the buyer. When the transit is at an end, the delivery is complete, and the right of stoppage gone. But until the goods have reached their place of ultimate destination, as agreed upon by the buyer and seller, they are ordinarily liable to stoppage. The right remains, not only while the goods are in motion, and not only while they are in the hands of the carrier, but also while they are in the hands of a ware-houseman, or place of deposit connected with their transmission or delivery. Covell v.…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Buckley v. Furniss & StickneyNew York Supreme Court · 1836
- Hause v. JudsonCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1836
- Cox v. BurnsSupreme Court of Iowa · 1855
3Cited by4 opinions
- Schuster, Hingston & Co. v. CarsonNebraska Supreme Court · 1890
- A. B. Symns & Co. v. Wm. Schotten & Co.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1886
- McFetridge v. PiperSupreme Court of Iowa · 1875
- Jones v. EarlCalifornia Supreme Court · 1869