Opinion

Fitzgerald v. Gorham

  • 4 Cal. 290
Court
California Supreme Court
Filed
Oct 15, 1854
Status
Published
Author
Heydeneeldt
On the bench
Heydeneeldt, Murray
Cited by
1 cases
Authority
More cited than 88.8%

The opinion

Mr. J. Heydeneeldt

delivered the opinion of the Court.

Mr. Ch. J. Murray concurred.

By the 15th section of the Statute of Frauds of this State, it is made conclusive evidence of fraud in the sale of goods, unless the sale is “accompanied by an immediate delivery, and be followed by an actual and continued change of possession .”

In this case there was, at the most, a mere constructive *291 change of possession, Josephs was continued in charge and control over the goods; and although the sale to the plaintiffs was in good faith, and Josephs was in like good faith their agent on clerk, jet the very case is presented upon which the statute intended to operate.

The continued- change of possession must be “actual," and not constructive.

Judgment affirmed.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.