B. Priestley & Co. v. Cunard S. S. Co.
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
1DissentL. Hand, Circuit Judge
It may be that the plaintiff got possession of the silk as soon as it was loaded on the truck; at least, I am ready to assume so; but a man may have possession of what he is not free to take away. The truck certainly could not have left the pier until its dray-man had procured and surrendered the permit, for the defendant’s watchman was set to prevent his leaving until he had. This was to make sure that he was authorized to act for the true consignee; if he turned out not to be, the goods would have been unloaded forcibly, if need were. The delivery was not yet complete, because the carrier…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Arthur v. St. Paul & Duluth RailroadSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1887
- Southern Grocery Co. v. BushSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1917
- Wichita Falls & N. W. R. Co. v. J. J. Brown Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1919