Star Compress & Warehouse Co. v. Meridian Cotton Co.

Citations

• 87 Miss. 228
• 39 So. 417

Syllabus

<p>1. Warehousemen. Receipts: Transfer. Innocent purchaser. Laws 1904, ch. 89, p. 125. Evidence.</p> <p>It is not permissible, as against a subsequent dona fide holder, to show that a warehouse receipt was issued by mistake, where it acknowledges the delivery of merchandise and binds the warehouseman to return the same or pay the market price thereof and stipulates that it shall be negotiable by indorsement and that no debt, demand, or set-off can be claimed against the merchandise, since laws 1904, ch. 89, p. 125, provides that all warehouse receipts shall be conclusive evidence in the hands of a dona fide holder for value that the property mentioned in the receipt had been .received.</p> <p>2. Same. Notice of existing equity.</p> <p>A bank, the holder of a warehouse receipt, is not shown to be a mala fide holder by testimony to the effect that one of its officers witnessed the execution of a paper by which a third person undertook to indemnify the warehouseman should it develop that another receipt then delivered to that person for certain merchandise was improperly issued.</p> <p>3. Same. Action on receipt. Issues. Proof variance.</p> <p>In a suit on a warehouse receipt testimony intended to establish ' the delivery of property different from that specified in the receipt and to show that the holder had received the proceeds thereof was not admissible where such issue was not made by the pleading.</p>