O'Bryan v. Fitzgerald
Supreme Court of Arkansas
APPEAL from Garland Circuit Court. Hon. J. B. Wood, Judge. Whether this was a sale, or a consignment, it was an illegal transaction ; the contract is invalid, as contemplating a violation of a statute, and cannot be made the foundation of a right to recover. Story Agency, sec. 344; 32 Ark., 620; 25 ib., 209; Garth., 252; lM.fr S.,596; lB.fr P., 551; ib., 593; 10 Post., 540 ; 24 Vt., 486; Story Sales •of Pers.
Read the full summary
APPEAL from Garland Circuit Court. Hon. J. B. Wood, Judge. Whether this was a sale, or a consignment, it was an illegal transaction ; the contract is invalid, as contemplating a violation of a statute, and cannot be made the foundation of a right to recover. Story Agency, sec. 344; 32 Ark., 620; 25 ib., 209; Garth., 252; lM.fr S.,596; lB.fr P., 551; ib., 593; 10 Post., 540 ; 24 Vt., 486; Story Sales •of Pers. Prop., sec. 505. Appellant, by accepting the goods under the contract, became the agent of appellee to sell the goods and account for the proceeds, and having sold them and received the…
1Opinion of the CourtCockrill, C. J.
Jacks and Fitzpatrick were partners in business, and largely engaged in the sale of “Fitzpatrick Bitters,” a compound containing intoxicating liquor as a chief ingredient, as the proof shows. They consigned twenty-five cases of this liquor to O’Bryan for sale, agreeing to give him all over a stated price per case realized. At the same time they represented to O’Bryan that the liquor could be sold without license, gave him a number of circulars for general distribution which contained the same statement, and authorized him to sell with a guaranty that the liquor could be resold without…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Brooks v. MartinSupreme Court of the United States · 1864
- Spring Co. v. KnowltonSupreme Court of the United States · 1881
- Willson v. OwenMichigan Supreme Court · 1874
- Baldwin Bros. v. PotterSupreme Court of Vermont · 1874
- Riley v. JordanMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1877
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Ashford v. MaceSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1912
- Wilt v. Town of RedkeyIndiana Court of Appeals · 1902
- Mackin v. ShannonU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Arkansas · 1908
- Forster v. HillCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1914
- Rust v. Caddo River Lumber CompanySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1925
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.