Davis v. Crozier & Co.
Supreme Court of South Carolina
Before Gary, Anderson, 1920. Action by T. B. Davis against W. H. Crozier & Co., in which State Bank & Trust Co. intervened and claimed the attached property. From directed verdict in favor of the intervener the plaintiff appeals. cites: Consignee not entitled to goods until draft is paid: 72 S. C., 454. Transfer back to consignee, revested title in them: 4 R. C. L., 32. cite: Verdict properly directed: 105 S. C., 128; 115 S. C., 137; 6 A. L. R., 234.
1DissentJustice Cothran
(dissenting) : I think that the petition should be granted for the following reasons:
The only ground relied upon in the leading opinion for a reversal of the judgment is that an issue of title to the oats was raised by the declarations of Crozier, the consignor and drawer of the draft, made over long-distance telephone to Pruitt, the consignee, after he had assigned the bill of lading and indorsed the draft to the bank, to the effect that he still held the bill of lading, and that the oats were his.
It does not seem to me that the question of the inadmissibility of this testimony is open to…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Stouffer v. ErwinSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1908