J. H. Richardson & Co. v. Nathan
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 147, Oct. T., 1894, by Atlas National Bank of Chicago, from judgment of C. P. No. 1, Allegheny Co., Sept. T., 1891, No. 62, and Dec. T., 1890, No. 956, for plaintiff on point reserved. Foreign attachment.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 147, Oct. T., 1894, by Atlas National Bank of Chicago, from judgment of C. P. No. 1, Allegheny Co., Sept. T., 1891, No. 62, and Dec. T., 1890, No. 956, for plaintiff on point reserved. Foreign attachment. A case stated in the nature of a special verdict was agreed upon by counsel and was as follows: “ Two car loads of iron, amounting to 890,700 lbs. were seized while in the possession of the Pennsylvania Railroad Co. by the sheriff of Allegheny county on an attachment of J. H. Richardson & Co., the plaintiff herein, against Marks Nathan, at No. 956, December term, 1890, Common…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mr. Justice McCollum,
We think the indorsements on the bills of lading cannot, under the circumstances shown by the special verdict, be justly considered as injuriously affecting the rights of the appellant to the property specified in the bills. The delivery of them was obviously made, accepted and intended as a pledge of the property as security for the sum advanced or paid on the draft to which they were attached, The purpose of the parties being evident, delivery without indorsement was sufficient to accomplish it: Holmes, Lafferty & Co. v. The German Security Bank, 87 Pa. 525.…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Holmes, Lafferty & Co. v. German Security BankSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1878
3Cited by4 opinions
- Halleck v. BresnahenWyoming Supreme Court · 1883
- Sloan v. JohnsonSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1902
- In re E. Reboulin Fils & Co.District Court, D. New Jersey · 1908
- First National Bank of Chicago v. W. J. Hartzell Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1913