Smith v. Gail

Citations

• 44 Fla. 803

Syllabus

<p>1. The right of a vender of goods to stop them in transitu, and thus to rescind the contract of sale, ceases whenever they have reached their destination, and the carrier of ■them has there parted with all possession, and control of them to the vendee, receiving all the freight charges, regardless of the undisclosed mental intentions or reservations of the vendee in receiving them.</p> <p>2 It appearing that H. & H„ partners in New York, sold and shipped to M. C. & Son., partners at Pensacola, Florida, certain boxes of shoes, which were received at Pensacola by the managing member of the firm of M. C. & Son., from . the railroad, he paying the freight thereon, and taking them into his exclusive custody, and while in his custody the sheriff levied attachments upon them, issued against the firm of M. C. & Son; the said managing partner not having disclosed up to that time any purpose or intention of having received the goods from the carrier for H. & H. and it not appearing that H. & H. ever demanded the goods of the carrier, or of the sheriff, until after the levy was made upon them, and the sheriff had taken them into his possession, in the trial, of an action brought by H. & H. .against the sheriff for the value of the. goods the following 'Charge to the jury was erroneous, viz: “If you find that that the goods was not delivered to M. Cashman & Son -under the contract, as owners, before the seizure by the ■-'defendant, or if the goods caine into their physical pos- .- session at all, that it was under a mistake, as to what the goods were, and that they would not have received them had they known what the goods were, and that when they .discovered what they were they held them, if at all, only .for plaintiffs, you will find for the plaintiffs.”</p>