Wood v. Roach
Supreme Court of the United States
THIS was a Scieri Facias against the defendant, as garnishee of twenty-one hogsheads of flax-feed, the property of James Elliot. The defence was, that the defendant being a captain of a ship, had received the flax-feed, and signed a bill of lading, engaging to deliver the flax-feed to a consignee in Europe.
Read the full summary
THIS was a Scieri Facias against the defendant, as garnishee of twenty-one hogsheads of flax-feed, the property of James Elliot. The defence was, that the defendant being a captain of a ship, had received the flax-feed, and signed a bill of lading, engaging to deliver the flax-feed to a consignee in Europe. To prove this Moylan offered a bill of lading not signed, but annexed to an affidavit by Roach, setting forth that it was a copy of one signed, and delivered to the consignee, before the attachment was laid. The evidence was to : And by M‘Kean, Chief Justice :—This is not the best evidence…
1Opinion of the Court
Shippen, Justice. *
The facts which the Jury must decide, are—1st. Whether a bill of lading was signed as the defendants contend. 2d. Whether the goods were consigned for the use of the consignee, or consignor. 3d. Whether a real debt was due from the consignor to the consignee. These being determined, the law is clear, that a consignor can stop the goods in transitu only in two cases, 1st. Where he has received no consideration ; And, 2d. Where the consignee is insolvent. If the goods were not vested in the consignee, the defence, arising from the demand of freight and indemnification, is not…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Nourse v. RiddellDistrict Court, S.D. California · 1956
- Grier v. GrierSupreme Court of the United States · 1786
- Fox & Bro. v. Willis & Bro.Texas Supreme Court · 1883
- Harrison v. HixsonIndiana Supreme Court · 1837