Baltimore & Ohio Southwestern Railway Co. v. Good

Citations

• 82 Ohio St. (N.S.) 278

Syllabus

<p>Sale of chattels for cash on delivery — Chattels in custody of bailee— Vendor without requiring payment — Gives vendee order on bailee — Vendee transfers to innocent purchaser — Original vendor cannot replevin from. ■ sub-vendee — Lazo of sales — Title of chattels.</p> <p>1. In sales of specific chattels for cash on delivery, delivery and payment are concurrent acts, and delivery in the expectation of receiving immediate payment is not absolute but conditional, and, when there is no waiver of payment, the property does not pass until the price is paid.</p> <p>2. In a sale for cash on delivery, when the goods are in the custody of a bailee and the vendor, without requiring payment, gives to the vendee a delivery order directing the bailee to deliver the goods to the vendee, or to his order, intending to transfer both the. property and possession, and the bailee pursuant to the order delivers the goods to a bona Me purchaser from the vendee, the delivery is as to the innocent purchaser absolute and not conditional, and the title of such sub-vendee is good against the seller, although the sale between the vendor and vendee was fraudulent.</p> <p>3. G. sold a car of oats to 13., terms cash on delivery, the weight to be ascertained and certified by the official weigher of the Cincinnati Chamber of Commerce, of which both were members. G. at the time of sale gave B. a delivery order on the carrier, in whose custody the car was, to deliver the car to B. or to B. or order. B. sold the oats to M. and transferred to him the delivery order. M. sold the oats to G. B., who surrendered the order to the carrier and ordered the car turned over to another carrier, which was done. M. on account of the sale to him paid B. $400, and G. B. paid M. $250. B. was insolvent and G. replevied the car in the possession of the carrier who had received it for G. B. Held: That G. was not entitled to recover the car.</p>