Greeley v. Hull

Citations

• 23 Fla. 361

Syllabus

<p>1. A delivery of chattels made with the intent upon the part of both the vendor and vendee that the latter shall hold under a deed about to be executed, and which is followed immediately by an execution of such deed, the vendee remaining in possession and exercising his ownership under such possession and deed, is a good delivery in law.</p> <p>2. B., an insolvent debtor, desiring to make an assignment of a stock of goods, &c., for the benefit of his creditors, applied to H. to act as assignee and the latter agreed to do so. Before executing the deed of assignment they were advised that a schedule of the property should be made and attached to the deed. B. and H. then went to the store, and took, with the aid of clerks, an account of the stock, and B., while there, delivered the property to H., who received possession and opened the store and began selling through his clerks, and employed B. as a clerk. B. and H. then went immediately to the office of the lawyer who had drawn the deed, and the schedule was annexed and the deed executed by both parties. After this an attachment sued out by Greeley was levied on the goods-; Held:</p> <p>1st. That the possession of H. was lawful, and as much unden' and by virtue of the deed as if it had been given after the execution of the deed.</p> <p>2d. That Hull’s title as assignee is good as against the attachment, and entitled him to recover the property.</p>