Atlas Rock Co. v. Miami Beach Builders' Supply Co.

Decision Date01 April 1925
Citation103 So. 615,89 Fla. 340
PartiesATLAS ROCK CO. v. MIAMI BEACH BUILDERS' SUPPLY CO.
CourtFlorida Supreme Court

En Banc.

Error to Circuit Court, Dade County; A. J. Rose, Judge.

A judgment by confession was rendered against J. W. Williams doing business as the Atlas Rock Company, in favor of the Miami Beach Builders' Supply Company, and the Atlas Rock Company interposed a claim as third party claimant. Judgment for plaintiff, and third party claimant brings error.

Reversed.

Syllabus by the Court

SYLLABUS

Bulk Sales Act interpreted and applied so as to limit operation thereof to bulk sales of goods, wares and merchandise. The title to chapter 5679, Acts of 1907, restricts the subject of the act to a regulation of 'the sale of stocks of goods wares and merchandise in bulk,' and the provisions of the act should be so interpreted and applied as to limit the operation of the act to the restricted subject expressed in the title.

Re-enactment in Revised General Statutes of Bulk Sales Act, without title does not change or enlarge scope of law. The re-enactment in the Revised General Statutes of chapter 5679, Acts 1907 without the title, does not change or enlarge the scope of the law in the absence of an indicated intent to alter the scope of the enactment.

Bulk Sales Law held not to make arbitrary or unreasonable classification. In so far as chapter 5679, the Bulk Sales Law (sections 3865 et seq., Revised General) Statutes 1920) is limited in its operation to wholesale and retail merchants, it does not appear to be an arbitrary or unreasonable classification for statutory regulations.

COUNSEL

H. H. Eyles, of Miami, and Fred T. Myers, of Tallahassee, for plaintiff in error.

Semple & Taylor, of Miami, for defendant in error.

OPINION

WHITFIELD, J.

Predicated upon a judgment by confession rendered on December 28, 1922, against J. W. Williams, doing business as Atlas Rock Company, in favor of the Miami Beach Builders' Supply Company for $501.60, an execution was issued and levied upon:

'1 Tow boat named 'Otto.' 1 barge approach. 2 barge rock crushers on property of W. G. Just. 2 piles of rock on Just property, also 1 pile of storage rock at Atlas Rock Co. yard.'

A claim as owner of the property was interposed by the Atlas Rock Company, a corporation, through its president, Chas. H. Bartlett, who had obtained the property from Williams before judgment and transferred it to the corporation. At a trial verdict and judgment for the plaintiff were rendered, and the Atlas Rock Company, a corporation, third party claimant, took writ of error.

It appears that the judgment creditor sought to subject the property to the judgment obtained against Williams upon the theory that the Bulk Sales Statute is applicable to the sale from Williams, the debtor, to Bartlett. The court apparently considered that, as in a sale and transfer of the property by Williams to Bartlett the Bulk Sales Law was not complied with, the issue was covered by a charge that:

'The burden of proving its claim to this property is upon the third party claimant, the Atlas Rock Company, a corporation, and, if you believe from the evidence that it has failed to establish its claim as an innocent purchaser for value from Bartlett, then your verdict should be for the plaintiff.'

Whether the transfer from Williams, to Bartlett was effectual as against the judgment creditor was the material consideration in the cause.

The court refused the following requested instruction:

'In this case the burden of proof in the first instance is upon the claimant to prove its title to the property levied upon. Upon such proof being made, the burden then shifts to the plaintiff to prove that the claimant either obtained such property in fraud of creditors or that such title was for some other reason void.'

The Bulk Sales Law is as follows:

'An Act to Regulate the Sale of Stocks of Goods, Wares and Merchandise in Bulk, and to Provide Certain Penalties Therefor, and for Other Purposes.

'Be it enacted by the Legislature of the state of Florida:

'Section 1. It shall be the duty of every person who shall bargain for or purchase any stock of goods, wares or merchandise in bulk for cash or credit, before paying or delivering to the vendor any part of the purchase price therefor, to demand and receive from the vendor thereof, and if the vendor be a corporation, then from the managing officer or agent thereof, a written statement under oath of the names and addresses of all the creditors of said vendor, together with the amount of indebtedness due or owing by the said vendor to each of such creditors; and it shall be the duty of such vendor to furnish such statement, whether be be a wholesale or a retail merchant.

'Sec. 2. Thereupon it shall be the duty of the purchaser, at least five (5) days before the completion of said purchase, or the payment therefor, to notify personally or by registered mail, each of said creditors of the said proposed sale, the price to be paid therefor, and the terms and conditions thereof.

'Sec. 3. When any person shall purchase any stock of goods, wares or merchandise in bulk and shall pay the price or any part thereof, or execute or deliver to the vendor thereof, or to his order, or to any person for his use, any promissory note, or other evidence of indebtedness, for said purchase price, or any part thereof, without having first demanded and received from said vendor the statement under oath mentioned in section one (1) of this act, and without first giving to each of the creditors whose names have been furnished by said vendor the notice provided for in section two (2) hereof, such sale or transfer shall, as to any and all creditors of the vendor, be presumed to be fraudulent.

'Sec 4. Any vendor of a stick of goods, wares or merchandise in bulk, who shall knowingly or willfully make or deliver, or cause to be made or delivered, any false statement or any statement of which any material portion is false, or shall fail to include the names of all his creditors in any such statement, as is required in section one (1) of this act, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and upon conviction thereof shall be punished by a fine of not...

To continue reading

Request your trial
3 cases
  • Gaspee Cab, Inc. v. McGovern
    • United States
    • Rhode Island Supreme Court
    • March 20, 1931
    ...165 Mich. 524, 131 N. W. 101; Bowen v. Quigley, 165 Mich. 337, 130 N. W. 690, 34 L. R. A. (N. S.) 218; Atlas Rock Co. v. Miami Beach Builders' Supply Co., 89 Fla. 340, 103 So. 615. The defendant relies upon Athon v. McAllister, 205 Ill. App. 41. The Illinois statute contains not only the wo......
  • De La Rosa v. Tropical Sandwiches, Inc.
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • July 12, 1974
    ...that the Uniform Commercial Code-Bulk Transfer Act applied to the purchase of the assets by appellant. The holding of our Supreme Court in Atlas, supra, appears equally applicable to the present Uniform Commercial Code-Bulk Transfer Act. We conclude, therefore, that sales of restaurant asse......
  • Atlas Rock Co. v. Miami Nat. Bank
    • United States
    • Florida Supreme Court
    • April 1, 1925
    ... ... judgment herein is reversed on the authority of Atlas ... Rock Co. v. Miami Beach Builders Supply Co., 103 So ... 615, this day decided ... WEST, ... C.J., and ... ...

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT