Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges

UNIVERSAL FEATURES ADVERTISING CO. v. PETTIT.

(Syllabus.)

SALES — Delivery of goods under uniform express receipt to Bills' Station not equivalent to delivery on contract to individual whose identity with consignee not established.

A consignment of goods to "Bills Station", under uniform express receipt, is not equivalent to delivery of goods on contract to an individual whose identity with consignee is not established.

RILEY, J.

Plaintiff in error sued defendant W.O. Pettit for a balance due on contract for advertising material sold and alleged to have been delivered to defendant according to terms of the contract. The contract provided for delivery to defendant, f.o.b. Dallas, Texas. Defendant denied delivery.

Plaintiff's evidence showed by a uniform express receipt, a consignment of the material to "Bills Station, Haileyville, Oklahoma," but the evidence wholly failed to establish defendant's connection, if any, with the consignee.

The general rule is that delivery of goods by a consignor to a common carrier is effective as a delivery to consignee. Kuppenheimer v. Levine, 116 Okla. 50, 243 P. 182; Rose v. Woldert Gro. Co., 54 Okla. 566, 154 P. 531. The rule is not applicable to the facts stated.

Affirmed.

HURST C.J., DAVISON, V.C.J., and WELCH, CORN, GIBSON, and LUTTRELL, JJ., concur.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

UNIVERSAL FEATURES ADVERTISING CO. v. PETTIT
(Sep 30, 1947)