Legal Opinion

Henney Buggy Co. v. Cathels

Supreme Court of Iowa

Decided December 15, 1899PublishedCited by 3 opinions

Appeal from Clarice District Court. — Hon. H. M. Towner, Judge. Action at law to recover possession of specific personal property. Trial to the court. Judgment for defendants, and plaintiff appeals.

1Opinion of the Court

Deemer, J.—

Plaintiff claims tbat it delivered some of tbe property in controversy to defendant Catbels, to be sold on commission with tbe agreement tbat the title should remain in it until settled for in cash; and tbat tbe remainder of tbe property was sent to Catbels for storage, and not for sale. Defendant Banker is tbe assignee of Catbels, and be *25and his assignor deny the plaintiff’s claim, and further plead .that Oathels purchased the property from the plaintiff.

2 The sole question in the ■ case is, was the contract between plaintiff and Oathels a sale or a bailment? An-agent of the…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Norwegian Plow Co. v. ClarkSupreme Court of Iowa · 1897

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Mayrath Company v. HelgesonSupreme Court of Iowa · 1966
  2. Hansen v. KuhnSupreme Court of Iowa · 1939
  3. Finnegan v. City of Sioux CitySupreme Court of Iowa · 1900

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API