Miller v. Somerset Cedar Post & Lumber Co.

• Decision Date: 09 June 1899
• Citation: 51 S.W. 615
• Parties: MILLER et al. v. SOMERSET CEDAR POST & LUMBER CO. [1]
• Court: Kentucky Court of Appeals

51 S.W. 615

MILLER et al. v. SOMERSET CEDAR POST & LUMBER CO. ^[1]

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.

June 9, 1899

Appeal from circuit court, Pulaski county.

"Not to be officially reported."

Action and attachment by D. F. Miller & Co. against M. S. Daniels. Judgment for the Somerset Cedar Post & Lumber Company, which interpleaded, claiming the attached property, and plaintiffs appeal. Affirmed.

James Denton and J. R. Cooke, for appellants.

C. H. Waddle, for appellee.

PAYNTER, J.

The appellants instituted an action against M. S. Daniels upon an alleged claim against him, obtained an order of attachment, and had it levied upon a car load of staves which had been delivered to the Cincinnati, New Orleans & Texas Pacific Railroad Company by appellees, who were doing business under the firm name of the Somerset Cedar Post & Lumber Company. The appellees interpleaded, claiming that the staves belonged to them. The sole question here is whether the staves belonged to the appellees or the defendant Daniels. The appellants claim that when the staves were delivered to the railroad company, consigned to Daniels, they were delivered to it for him, and thus became his property. On the other hand, the appellees contend that they, under their contract with Daniels, were to deliver the staves to him at Newark, N. J., to be inspected and counted by him. If the latter claim be true, then, of course, the staves belonged to the appellees at the time the order of attachment was levied upon them, and they could not be taken to pay the debt of Daniels. We think the evidence in this case shows that the staves were to be delivered to Daniels, at Newark, N. J., by the appellees. The appellees could not have recovered, upon the contract, their purchase price, unless the staves had been delivered to Daniels at Newark, N. J. The judgment is affirmed.

---------

Notes:

^[1] Reported by Edward W. Hines, Esq., of the Frankfort bar, and formerly state reporter.

---------