Gatiss v. Cyr

96 N.W. 26, 134 Mich. 233, 1903 Mich. LEXIS 623
CourtMichigan Supreme Court
DecidedJuly 14, 1903
DocketDocket No. 45
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 96 N.W. 26 (Gatiss v. Cyr) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Michigan Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Gatiss v. Cyr, 96 N.W. 26, 134 Mich. 233, 1903 Mich. LEXIS 623 (Mich. 1903).

Opinion

Gbant, J.

(after stating the facts). If delivery by the plaintiff to the common carrier for shipment was both a delivery to and an acceptance by the defendant, the case is not within the statute; otherwise it is. While some authorities hold that a common carrier is the agent of the vendee for delivery and acceptance (Strong v. Dodds, 47 Vt. 348; Leggett & Meyer Tobacco Co. v. Collier, 89 Iowa, 144 [56 N. W. 417]), the contrary rule is established by the decisions of this court (Grimes v. Van Vechten, 20 Mich. 410; Webber v. Howe, 36 Mich. 150; Smith v. Brennan, 62 Mich. 349 [28 N. W. 892, 4 Am. St. Rep. 867]; Kuppenheimer v. Wertheimer, 107 Mich. 78 [64 N. W. 952, 61 Am. St. Rep. 317]). Under these decisions the court below correctly held the contract void, and directed a verdict for the defendant.

The judgment is affirmed.

The other Justices concurred.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Spedding v. Griggs
162 N.W. 956 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1917)
Calvert v. Schultz
106 N.W. 1123 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1906)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
96 N.W. 26, 134 Mich. 233, 1903 Mich. LEXIS 623, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gatiss-v-cyr-mich-1903.