Covell v. Hitchcock
Court for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors
[ *612 ] Error from the supreme court. This was an action of Hrover, brought by Hitchcock against Covell, sheriff of the county of Chemung, for selling, by virtue of an execution against one Hobart Graves, junior, a quantity of merchandize sold by the plaintiff to Graves, which he claimed the right to stop in transitu, in consequence of the insolvency of Graves. In April, 1832, the plaintiff in New-York sold the goods to Graves, who resided at Willardsburgh.
Read the full summary
[ *612 ] Error from the supreme court. This was an action of Hrover, brought by Hitchcock against Covell, sheriff of the county of Chemung, for selling, by virtue of an execution against one Hobart Graves, junior, a quantity of merchandize sold by the plaintiff to Graves, which he claimed the right to stop in transitu, in consequence of the insolvency of Graves. In April, 1832, the plaintiff in New-York sold the goods to Graves, who resided at Willardsburgh. Graves directed the goods to be shipped on board a lake or canal boat bound to the village of Havana ; they were boxed, directed to…
1Opinion of the Court
*By the Chancellor.
The first question which arises in this [ *613 ] cause, is upon the right of the vendor to stop the goods in transitu after they arrived at Havana. The law appears to be well settled that the right of stoppage in transitu exists so long as the goods remain in the hands of a middleman on the way to the place of their destination, and that the right terminates, whenever the goods are or have been, either actually or constructively delivered to the vendee ; a delivery to the general agent of the vendee is of course tantamount to a delivery to himself. The time during which the…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Buckley v. Furniss & StickneyNew York Supreme Court · 1836
3Cited by2 opinions
- Halff, Weiss & Co. v. Chas. H. Allyn & Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1883
- Audenried v. RandallUnited States Circuit Court · 1868