Jump to content

Schooner Freeman v. Buckingham

From Wikisource


Schooner Freeman v. Buckingham
by Benjamin Robbins Curtis
Syllabus
704608Schooner Freeman v. Buckingham — SyllabusBenjamin Robbins Curtis
Court Documents

United States Supreme Court

59 U.S. 182

Schooner Freeman  v.  Buckingham

THIS was an appeal from the circuit court of the United States for the northern district of New York.

The case is stated in the opinion of the court. would be estopped, in favor of a bon a fide for the appellant, and Mr. Ganson, for the appellee.

Mr. Haven made the following points:--

1. Hickox, the claimant, was the owner of the schooner Freeman. He agreed to sell her to John Holmes for $4,500, payable in five instalments, at various times from June, 1851, to December, 1853. And on such payments being made, and other conditions complied with, he agreed to give John Holmes a good and sufficient bill of sale of her, &c. By this agreement, the property of the claimant in the schooner was not devested. Hilliard on Sales, title 'Conditional Sales,' pp. 18-23; Barrett v. Pritchard, 2 Pick. 512; Ayer v. Bartlett, 9 Pick. 156; West v. Bolton, 4 Verm. Rep. 558; Herring v. Willard, 2 Sandf. Sup. Ct. Rep. 418.

Mem.-Kent, in his Commentaries, (vol. ii. p. 497,) says: 'When there is a condition precedent attached to a contract of sale and delivery, the property does not vest in the vendee on delivery, until the performance of the condition, or the seller waives it; and the right continues in the vendor, even against the creditors of the vendee.'

He cites Strong v. Taylor, 2 Hill, 326, which is in point, and was decided by Justice Nelson.

Notes

[edit]

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).

Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse