Riordan & Co. v. Doty

Citations

• 50 S.C. 537
• 27 S.E. 939
• 1897 S.C. LEXIS 43

Syllabus

<p>1. Contract — Cotton Futures — Rev. Stat., 1859-60-61 — Nonsuit. A party bringing an action on a contract arising out of the future delivery of cotton must show (1) that the party making such contract was the owner or assignee thereof at the time the contract was made, or (2) that the seller was at the time authorized by the owner or assignee, or his duly authorized agent, to make such sale, or (3) that it was the bona fide intention of both parties, at time of making such contract, that the cotton should be actually delivered at such future time — construing Rev. Stat., 1859, 1860, 1861.</p> <p>2. Ibid. — Ibid.—Broker—Agent—Rev. Stat., 1861. — A broker or agent who places a contract in cotton futures, has no cause of action, under statutes of this State, for money advanced for his principal in filling such contract. Rev. Stat., 1861, construed.</p> <p>3. Assignee — Cotton Futures. — An assignee of a claim for moneys advanced in filling a contract in cotton futures cannot maintain an action thereon in this State. Rev. Stat., 1861, construed.</p> <p>4. Evidence. — The rules and by-laws of the New York Cotton Exchange were properly excluded in this case, in absence of proof tending to show that defendant had assented to or knew of them.</p>