Halff, Weiss & Co. v. Chas. H. Allyn & Co.

Citations

• 60 Tex. 278
• 1883 Tex. LEXIS 320

Syllabus

<p>1. Goods in transitu.— Goods, when shipped, are deemed to be in transitu, not only while in the actual possession of the carrier, whether on land or water, though the carrier may have been appointed by the consignee, but also while they remain in any place of deposit connected with their transmission and delivery, and until they arrive in the actual or constructive possession of the consignee at the place named by the buyer to the seller as their place of destination. Following Chandler v. Fulton, 10 Tex., 1, and Covell v. Hitchcock, 23 Wend., 613.</p> <p>2. Goods in transitu—Evidence.— A bill of lading for goods to a railroad depot, the shipping point for a neighboring town for which they were destined, cannot determine that depot as the destination contemplated between the buyer and seller. Were it otherwise, the legal effect of the bill of lading would be for the court and not the jury.</p> <p>3. Goods in transitu.— The fact that goods are received at the nearest railway depot to their place of destination, by one who exhibited the bills of lading to the carrier, and had an order for their delivery from the purchaser, does not of itself determine the fact that on their delivery, on the order, they ceased to be in transitu, in the absence of evidence showing the purpose for which the order for their delivery was given. Chandler v. Fulton, 10 Tex., 1, cited and approved.</p> <p>4. Charge of court.— See opinion for a charge in regard to goods in transitu held to be erroneous, in holding that the transit of goods ceased on their delivery to an agent of the purchaser, when the jury should have been told that the goods were still in transitu if they were only received by the agent to be forwarded to their original destination.</p>