Brown v. Price

• Decision Date: 27 January 1925
• Citation: 207 Ky. 8
• Parties: Brown v. Price, et al.
• Court: United States State Supreme Court — District of Kentucky

207 Ky. 8

Brown v. Price, et al.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.

Decided January 27, 1925.

1. Sales — Coal Accepted, if Barges were Point of Delivery when Buyers Moved them Away. — In contract for sale of coal, if buyers' barges were point of delivery, buyers accepted coal under contract

when they hooked onto barges loaded therewith, and transported them up river to a point several miles away.

2. Sales — Contract Consummated when Dominion has been Exercised Over Goods by Purchaser by Removing them from Place of Delivery. — When goods are received in discharge of a contract, and dominion has been exercised over them by purchaser by removing them from place of delivery, contract is consummated, for removal of goods from place of delivery is an acceptance, especially where buyer has an opportunity to inspect the goods.

3. Sales — Buyers Held Liable for Price of Coal, Notwithstanding Defects where they had Full Opportunity to Examine Before Removing from Place of Delivery. — Buyers were liable for price of coal sold to them, notwithstanding that its quality did not measure up to contract requirements, where they had full opportunity for examination before they removed it from place of delivery.

Appeal from Warren Circuit Court.

W.B. GAINES, W.R. GARDNER and SMITH & BARNES for appellant.

THOMAS, THOMAS & LOGAN and M.L. HEAVERIN for appellees.

OPINION OF THE COURT BY JUDGE SAMPSON.

Reversing.

This litigation was commenced by appellee Price against appellant, Fox Brown, in the Warren circuit court, in November, 1922, on a verbal contract between Brown on the one side and Price and Hamilton on the other, for the purchase of slack coal at the price of ten (10c) cents per bushel, it being alleged by Price in his original petition that such a contract was made between them, and that pursuant to it he had advanced Brown the sum of $300.00 and that the slack furnished by Brown was old and worthless; that in towing the coal in barges from the place of delivery to Bowling Green, the place of business of appellee Price, he had expended $400.00, and these sums he sought to recover. He also averred that if appellee Brown had furnished slack coal in accordance with the contract that he (Price) could and would have made a profit of $400.00 on the two barges of coal. Appellant Brown answered and admitted that he made the contract, but denied the averments of the petition with respect to the quality of the coal, and later filed an amended answer in which he pleaded the coal was of the quality sold and contracted to be delivered, and by way of counterclaim averred he was entitled to recover the balance due on 10,000 bushels of coal at ten cents (10c) per bushel, being $700.00. In a reply filed by Price, in which Hamilton joined as party plaintiff, it is averred "that just prior to the 16th day of August, 1922, the plaintiff, Rhea G. Price, made a contract with the defendant, at defendant's solicitation, for two barges of new slack as set out in plaintiff's petition, at the sum of ten cents (10c) per bushel, the weight to be determined and governed by railroad weights, and that in pursuance to said agreement the defendant, Fox Brown, did furnish two barge loads of slack, but it was old slack, unfit for use and unmarketable in every respect." In the original petition it is averred that "on or about the — day of October,...