Rex Buggy Co. v. Dinneen
South Dakota Supreme Court
Appeal from Circuit Court, Beadle County. Hon. Chas. 8. Whiting, Judge. Action by the Rex Buggy Company against Stephen D. Din-neen. There was a verdict for defendant. A new trial was granted, .and defendant appeals.
1Opinion of the CourtMcCOY, J.
This is an appeal from an order of the circuit court granting a new trial, where a verdict was rendered in favor of defendant. The plaintiff claimed to be the owner of certain buggies stored in the warehouse of Hathaway-Hanson Company at Sioux City, Iowa, and that, while said buggies were so stored, they were wrongfully and without plaintiff's knowledge or consent shipped to South Dakota, and sold to defendant. The defendant contends that he is an innocent purchaser of said buggies for value from an ostensible agent of plaintiff. Immediately upon discovering the whereabouts of said buggies…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Flint & Walling Mfg. Co v. McDonaldSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1908
- Sucker State Drill Co. v. WirtzNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1908
- Rochford v. AlbaughSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1903
3Cited by8 opinions
- Sioux Remedy Co. v. CopeSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1911
- Huntsman v. First National Bank of El PasoArizona Supreme Court · 1926
- Rex Buggy Co. v. DinneenSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1912
- Sioux Remedy Co. v. LindgrenSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1911
- Security State Bank v. Bank of CentervilleSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1923
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.