A. P. Loveman & Co. v. Alabama, Tennessee & Northern R. R.
Supreme Court of Alabama
Appeal from Pickens Circuit Court. Heard before Hon. S. H. Sprott. Action by A. P. Loveman & Co. against the Alabama, Tennessee & Northern Railroad Company for failure to deliver cotton. Judgment for defendant, and plaintiffs appeal. It appears from the evidence that the cotton was in a warehouse in Aliceville that was owned and operated by Arch Hood, who urns also cotton agent for the defendant company for Aliceville.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Pickens Circuit Court. Heard before Hon. S. H. Sprott. Action by A. P. Loveman & Co. against the Alabama, Tennessee & Northern Railroad Company for failure to deliver cotton. Judgment for defendant, and plaintiffs appeal. It appears from the evidence that the cotton was in a warehouse in Aliceville that was owned and operated by Arch Hood, who urns also cotton agent for the defendant company for Aliceville. It also appeared that the bills of lading upon which the suit was brought were issued by said Hood as such agent while the cotton was still in his warehouse; that the cotton…
1Opinion of the Court
McCLELLAN, j.
Mr. Hood’s contemporary, yet wholly distinct and independent, relations of warehouseman and of “cotton agent” of the defendant, which was without interest, in any degree, in the warehouse business conducted by Mr. Hood individually, rendered it impossible, under the doctrine of the decision in Lehman, Durr & Co. v. Pritchett, 84 Ala. 512, 4 South. 601, for Mr. Hoed, as warehouseman, to deliver, actually or constructively, the cotton in question to the common carrier (the defendant, appellee) while there was outstanding, undelivered and uncanceled, warehouse receipts *319tlierefor,…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Lehman, Durr & Co. v. PritchettSupreme Court of Alabama · 1887