American Cigar Co. v. Foster
| Decision Date | 24 April 1877 |
| Citation | 36 Mich. 368 |
| Court | Michigan Supreme Court |
| Parties | The American Cigar Company v. Frank W. Foster |
Submitted on Briefs April 11, 1877
Case made from Superior Court of Grand Rapids.
Judgment reversed, and judgment entered against Foster for that sum, with interest from February 17, 1877, the date of the finding, and costs of both courts.
J. A. Fairfield, for plaintiff, cited.--Comp. L., § 4706; Tannahill v. Tuttle, 3 Mich. 105; People v. Bristol, 35 Mich. 28; Montgomery v. Wight, 8 Mich. 149; Thompson v. Van Vechten, 5 Abb. Pr., 437; Worthington v. Hanna, 23 Mich. 531; Leland v. Collver, 34 Mich. 418; Eggleston v. Mundy, 4 Mich. 297.
Blair, Stone & Kingsley, for defendant, cited.--Hamilton v. Rogers, 8 Md. 301; Otis v. Sill, 8 Barb. 102; Rowan v. Sharp's Rifle Manf. Co., 29 Conn. 282; 33 Conn. 577; 13 Metc. 17; 2 Story 630; Leland v. Collver, 34 Mich. 418; Fowler v. Hoffman, 31 Mich. 215; Holly v. Brown, 14 Conn. 254.
The plaintiff sued Foster for the conversion of certain goods mortgaged to them by one Johnson on the 31st day of August, 1875. The mortgage covered expressly not only all goods then in store, but all other goods to be thereafter pet there. The goods in question were not put there until the 4th of October, 1875. The mortgage was filed November 4th, 1875. Foster bought the goods on the 6th of November, in good faith, but with actual knowledge of the mortgage. The court below held that he held them free of the mortgage.
We need not inquire whether this would have been so if he had no such actual knowledge. As between the mortgages and Johnson there can be no doubt the goods were bound, and the latter could not refuse to deliver them up. We know of no principle which puts a purchaser with notice on any better footing than his vendor. Foster was therefore guilty of the conversion charged against him.
The finding of facts shows the value of the property to have been one hundred and ninety-four dollars. The judgment below must be reversed, and judgment entered against Foster for that sum, with interest from February 17, 1877, the date of the finding, and costs of both courts.
The other justices concurred.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Preston Nat. Bank of Detroit v. George T. Smith Middlings Purifier Co.
...of business has been recognized in this state in numerous cases, commencing with Leland v. Collver, 34 Mich. 418. See, also, Cigar Co. v. Foster, 36 Mich. 368; Robson Railroad Co., 37 Mich. 70; Eddy v. McCall, 71 Mich. 497, 39 N.W. 734; Fuller v. Railroad Co., 43 N.W. 1085. I can see no rea......
-
Richardson v. Alpena Lumber Co.
... ... have actual knowledge, American Cigar Co. v. Foster, 36 Mich ... 368; Robson v. Mich. Cent. R. R. Co., 37 Mich. 70; a mortgage ... ...
-
Sharp v. Hollister
...validity. Wells Fargo & Co. v. Alturas Commerce Co., 6 Idaho 506, 56 P. 165; Dodge v. Smith, 5 Kan. App. 742, 46 P. 990; American Cigar Co. v. Foster, 36 Mich. 368; Cumberland Bank v. Baker et al., 57 N.J.Eq. 231, 40 A. 850; Singer Piano Co. v. Barnard, Walker Co., 113 Iowa 664, 83 N.W. 725......
-
In re Dagwell
... ... the same manner and to the same extent as any other kind of ... chattel mortgage. American Cigar Co. v. Foster, 36 ... Mich. 368; Robson v. Michigan Central R.R. Co., 37 ... Mich. 70; Eddy ... ...