# Yaeger Milling Co. v. Brown

> Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · January 19, 1880 · 128 Mass. 171

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6419821

## Case

- **Full name:** Yaeger Milling Company v. Daniel Brown & another
- **Court:** Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
- **Decided:** January 19, 1880
- **Citations:** 128 Mass. 171; 1880 Mass. LEXIS 32
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Opinion of the court by Lord
- **Judges:** Lord
- **Cited by:** 1 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6419821

## Opinion text

Lord, J.
The only question for trial in the court below was whether the plaintiff sold, and the defendants bought, the flour replevied, or whether the plaintiff as consignor sent the flour to the defendants, who received it as consignees. From the plaintiff’s letter it appears that the flour was sent to the defendants for them to exercise their election whether to purchase or to receive it on consignment. That was a fact to be determined by the presiding judge upon the evidence. The evidence was conflicting. The defendant Brown was permitted to testify that he elected to receive it as purchaser, and this evidence was objected to; and the competency of that evidence is the only question raised on this bill of exceptions. Its competency is too plain for discussion. There was no question of mental processes of the defendant, but simply a question of fact whether he did or did not at the time exercise his election, and accept the flour as purchaser. The finding of the presiding judge is conclusive of the fact; and that finding, having been made upon competent testimony, must stand. Exceptions overruled.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6419821. Public record. Not legal advice.