Hastings v. Lincoln Trust Co.

Citations

• 115 Wash. 492
• 197 P. 627
• 18 A.L.R. 583
• 1921 Wash. LEXIS 761

Syllabus

<p>Receivers (74)—Actions — Right op Action by Receivers — Claims on Behalp op Creditors. A receiver of an insolvent debtor was entitled to tbe possession of an automobile, stored by tbe debtor with a warehouse company upon which it had issued its receipt reciting that it would deliver same to the debtor “or order, at our warehouse, as and when directed upon the surrender of this receipt properly endorsed”, notwithstanding an attempted pledge of the car by delivery of the warehouse receipt without indorsement to the pledgee; since such transfer of the receipt was not sufficient in itself to constitute a delivery of possession as against the right of the receiver to administer the property of the insolvent.</p> <p>Pledges (3)—Validity—Delivery and Possession—Unindorsed Warehouse Receipt. Delivery of pledged property by the pledgor to the pledgee is absolutely necessary to the life of the contemplated pledge; and, while actual physical .movement of the property from the hands of one to the other may not be necessary, delivery of possession must be of such nature that the control and dominion over the property passes from the pledgor into the absolute control and dominion of the pledgee.</p> <p>Warehousemen (3)—Receipts—Negotiability and Transfer— Effect of Delivery Without Indorsement. Under the provisions of Rem. Code, § 3369, to the effect that a warehouse receipt can be transferred only by indorsement, mere delivery of an unindorsed warehouse receipt to a pledgee would not constitute delivery of possession of the goods, as against a receiver claiming right of possession for the benefit of creditors.</p>