Tuttle v. Cheeves

• Decision Date: 04 January 1893
• Citation: 16 S.E. 955,90 Ga. 653
• Parties: TUTTLE et al. v. CHEEVES, (EXCHANGE BANK OF FT. VALLEY, Intervener.)
• Court: Georgia Supreme Court

16 S.E. 955

90 Ga. 653

TUTTLE et al. v. CHEEVES, (EXCHANGE BANK OF FT. VALLEY, Intervener.)

Supreme Court of Georgia

January 4, 1893

Syllabus by the Court.

1. In a claim case, evidence tending to show that the defendant in execution purchased the property levied on, not for himself but as the agent of another; that the claimant had advanced the money to pay for the property under a contract with the agent that the title should be in the claimant until reimbursed for the money so advanced, and that such reimbursement was to be made by the principal of the agent making the purchase,--is admissible in favor of the claimant as a part of the history of the transaction under investigation, and should not be rejected as tending to show title in a stranger to the record.

2. The evidence showing that the title to the property levied on was not in the defendant in execution, but was for the time being in the claimant as security for the purchase money which the claimant had advanced, and which was to be refunded by the person for whom the defendant in execution acted as agent in purchasing the property, there was no error in adjudging that such property was not subject to the execution.

Error from superior court, Houston county; A. L. MILLER, Judge.

Action by Tuttle & Wakefield against one Cheeves to recover a quantity of cotton. The Exchange Bank of Ft. Valley intervened, and claimed the cotton. There was judgment for the claimant, and plaintiffs bring error. Affirmed.

W. H Harris and W. A. Matthews, for plaintiffs in error.

W. C Winslow and Preston & Giles, for defendants in error.

LUMPKIN J.

Cheeves was engaged at Ft. Valley in the business of buying cotton not for himself, but for others. He had made an arrangement with the Exchange Bank of that place by which the bank was to pay for such cotton as he might purchase upon orders received from his customers, upon the express contract that the title to the same should be in the bank until it was reimbursed for the purchase money so advanced. In pursuance of this contract, the warehouse receipts, which controlled the possession, were to be delivered to the bank in every instance before it furnished the money to pay for the cotton contracted for by Cheeves. For convenience, payments for the cotton were made by the bank upon checks drawn by Cheeves, the amounts of which were charged upon an account kept with him for this purpose, and this account was credited by all sums received by the bank from Cheeves' customers in payment of cotton bought for them. When cotton was shipped to such customers, the bills of lading issued by the railroad were turned over to the bank, and the possession thereof was retained by the bank until the money advanced had been repaid. As to the particular transaction now under review, it appears from the record that Strauss & Co., of Savannah, sent an order for the purchase of cotton to Gray Bros., one of the...