Skip to main content
· 1/11/1913

Stewart v. Henningsen Produce Co.

Citations

  • 88 Kan. 521
  • 129 P. 181
  • 1913 Kan. LEXIS 376

Syllabus

<p>SYLLABUS BY THE COURT.</p> <p>1. Sale—Contract—Rule of Construction—When Property Vests in Buyer. The prima facie rule of construction of a contract for the sale of goods not in existence but to be produced by the seller is, that the parties intended that the property vested in the buyer and the right to the price in the seller as soon as the contract came to relate to specific ascertained goods; and the inquiry in such a case must always be whether there is any sufficient indication of a contrary intention.</p> <p>2. Same. Where the goods contracted for are an entire quantity and there is nothing in the circumstances of the case to indicate a contrary intention, the risk of loss .attaches to the quantity of goods only when completed, and ready for delivery, and not to each separate installment as completed and ready for delivery.</p> <p>3. Same. Plaintiff agreed to sell and defendant to take at specified prices 10,000 pounds each of “whites” and “yolks” of eggs; the product known as “egg-meats” was to be put up by plaintiff in fifty-pound cans from number one “candled” eggs, the cans as filled to be placed in cold storage and delivered “f. o. b.” plaintiff’s station as ordered out by defendant. The contract was entered into in April and the plaintiff was to pay all charges up to January first for “storage, insurance and interest.” The quantity bargained for was not completed and stored until October 12. The whites were all shipped on defendant’s order, received in good condition and paid for. The yolks were ordered out in the following March and were found to be rotton and unfit for consumption. In an action for the price of the yolks it is held, that the contract was entire and indivisible; that the property passed October 12, when nothing remained to be done by plaintiff to put the goods in a deliverable state, and that any loss occurring after that time was the defendant’s.</p> <p>4. Stipulation that One Party Shall Insure. While a provision that either party

Judges: Porter

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.