Goldstein v. Maloney

• Decision Date: 19 December 1911
• Parties: GOLDSTEIN v. MALONEY.
• Court: Florida Supreme Court

57 So. 342

62 Fla. 198

GOLDSTEIN v. MALONEY.

Florida Supreme Court, Division A.

December 19, 1911

Error to Circuit Court, Monroe County; J. B. Wall, Judge.

Action of replevin by Norvin G. Maloney, as trustee in bankruptcy of Sarah H. Davis, against Louis M. Goldstein. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant brings error. Affirmed.

Syllabus by the Court

SYLLABUS

Great latitude is accorded to the lawmaking power in selecting and classifying subjects for statutory regulation, and, if a classification made has a reasonable basis in real differences of practical conditions with reference to the subject regulated and is not merely arbitrary, it will not be regarded as unjustly discriminatory and will not of itself be a denial of the equal protection of the laws.

A dlassification, covering 'every person who shall bargain for or purchase any stock of goods, wares, or merchandise in bulk,' apparently has a reasonable basis in practical differences in the conditions affecting those engaged in trade, and such classification is not merely arbitrary, nor patently an unjust discrimination among those who sell and buy.

Rules of evidence and procedure that are prescribed by the courts and by statutes may be changed by statute when substantive rights secured by the Constitution are not thereby invaded.

It is competent for the Legislature to create by law prima facie presumptions of evidence without denying due process of law where such presumptions may be a natural or reasonable inference from the facts or circumstances from which the presumptions are raised by the statute, and the opposite party is not deprived of the right to rebut the presumptions in some fair manner duly provided or accorded by the rules of law or procedure.

Where a statute regulating the sale of goods in bulk provides that a sale made without complying with the statute 'shall, as to any and all creditors of the vendor, be presumed to be fraudulent,' the presumption is only prima facie and may be rebutted.

Where the evidence justifies a finding of the trial court that a sale of goods was 'out of the usual or ordinary course of business or trade of the vendor,' the finding will not be disturbed.

COUNSEL Jefferson Browne, for plaintiff in error.

W. Hunt Harris, for defendant in error.

OPINION

WHITFIELD C.J.

Sarah H. Davis, a retail dealer in dry goods, being indebted in excess of her assets, on November 15, 1910, sold to Louis M Goldstein, her son-im-law, 448 pairs of shoes for $424, which was 10 per cent. more than the invoice price of said shoes there being other shoes left in the stock. The purchaser did not comply with the statute (chapter 5679, Acts of 1907), requiring a purchaser of 'any stock of goods, wares, or merchandise in bulk' to give notice of the contemplated purchase to the creditors of the vendor, or the purchase will be presumed fraudulent as to any and all creditors of the vendor. On November 16, 1910, Sarah H. Davis was adjudged a bankrupt, and the shoes were replevied by the trustee in bankruptcy. To the judgment in favor of the trustee in bankruptcy this writ of error was taken. It is contended that chapter 5679 is unconstitutional and that the sale here is not within the statute. The statute is as follows:

'Chapter 5679--(No. 84).

'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 he 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 stock 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 more than five hundred dollars ($500.00), or by

...