BLUE BELT FERTILIZER COMPANY, A GEORGIA CORPORATION,
v.
P. P. PULLEN
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Blue Belt Fertilizer Company sold 30 sacks of fertilizer to farmer P. P. Pullen in August 1933, with 22 sacks to be stored in a warehouse pending Pullen's demand. When Blue Belt refused to deliver the remaining sacks in November 1933, Pullen sued in replevin. The Florida Supreme Court upheld the lower courts' judgment for Pullen, holding that the storage receipt constituted sufficient delivery and that the question of whether the replevied fertilizer was the same fertilizer sold was a factual matter properly resolved against Blue Belt.
The Court held that replevin properly lies because the storage receipt executed and delivered by Cheney constituted sufficient delivery of the fertilizer to Pullen under the sales contract, and Blue Belt agreed to care for the stored fertilizer until called for. The question of whether the replevied fertilizer was the same fertilizer sold was a factual question properly resolved by the jury and trial court against Blue Belt.
“The contract of assignment or receipt showing the sale to Pullen was executed by him (Cheney) and delivered to Pullen when the sale was made, it is ample to constitute delivery of the fertilizer to Pullen, and it was thereby agreed by petitioner to take care of the fertilizer not delivered until called for by Pullen.”
Establishes that the storage receipt constituted sufficient delivery and imposed an obligation on Blue Belt to maintain the fertilizer in storage pending Pullen's demand.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceOn August 5, 1933, P. P. Pullen purchased 30 sacks of fertilizer from H. L. Cheney, Blue Belt's agent in Homestead, Florida, paying cash. Pullen recei…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Delivery Of Goods cases and more on FLexlaw
— Petitioner, Blue Belt Fertilizer Company, a Georgia Corporation, operated a fertilizer warehouse in Homestead, Florida, by and through its agent, H. L. Cheney. Respondent, P. P. Pullen, a farmer living in the vicinity of Homestead, purchased thirty sacks of fertilizer from Cheney August 5, 1933, paying cash and taking Cheney’s receipt therefor. The receipt provided that “this fertilizer to be stored in Homestead warehouse and delivered to P. P. Pullen as called for. To be insured and kept in good condition. No charge for storage or delivery.
Pullen took eight sacks of the fertilizer at the time he purchased and later inquired about the balance which was at the time pointed out to him by Cheney. On November 6, 1933, Pullen again made demand on Cheney for the balance of the fertilizer, but this demand was refused and a writ of replevin was sued out and levy made on twenty-twO' sacks of fertilizer by Pullen. Redelivery bond was executed by petitioner and possession of the fertilizer was taken by it.
The case came on for trial before the Justice of the Peace in and for the Fourth Justice District of Dade County, who after hearing the evidence entered judgment against the petioner, who was defendant in the trial court. Said judgment was on appeal affirmed by the Circuit Court, a rehearing and reargument were granted resulting in a reaffirmance by the Circuit Court of its previous decision. Petitioner now seeks to quash this judgment on certiorari.
The sale and payment for the fertilizer and the delivery of the eight sacks to respondent in the manner stated is not disputed. Petitioner contends that replevin will not lie because the twenty-two sacks which were left in the warehouse had been sold and were never delivered to respondent, that the fertilizer replevined was actually manufactured and *166shipped to the warehouse months after the sale, and had no relation to the contract of sale.
There is no question of the agency o.f Cheney, though it is shown that he was discharged about the time this litigation was started. The contract of assignment or receipt showing the sale to Pullen was executed by him (Cheney) and delivered to Pullen when the sale was made, it is ample to constitute delivery of the fertilizer to Pullen, and it was thereby agreed by petitioner to take care of the fertilizer not delivered until called for by Pullen. The only other question presented was whether the fertilizer replevined was that actually sold and delivered to Pullen. This was a question of fact for the jury. It is true that several mouths had intervened, but the company agreed to take care of the fertilizer until called for. The evidence on this point was in conflict and the court resolved the conflicts against petitioner.
This Court will not review conflicting evidence on certiorari. It is not shown or contended that the judgment of the trial court was induced by illegal evidence. The writ of certiorari granted herein is accordingly quashed.
Ellis, P. J., and Terrell and Buford, J. J., concur.
'' Whitfield, C. J., and Brown and Davis, J. J., concur in the opinion and judgment.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
North Miami v. Seaway Corp., 151 Fla. 301 (Fla. 1942)…to proceed [*303] according to the essential requirements of the law. It is well settled that this Court will not review conflicts and disputes appearing in the testimony on petition for a writ of certiorari. See Blue Belt Fertilizer Co. v. Pullen, 125 Fla. 164, 169 So. 615; Seven Seas, Inc., v. Buckholtz, 121 Fla. 205, 163 So. 567; Robbins Holding Co. v. Morris, 131 Fla. 205, 179 So. 404. The Seaway Corporation filed its amended declaration in the Civil Court of Record of Dade County against North Miami,…
-
London Guar. & Accident Co., Ltd. v. I. C. Helmly Furniture Co., Inc., 153 Fla. 453 (Fla. 1943)…d verdict. We find disputes and conflicts in the evidence for a jury, under appropriate instructions. This Court, on common law certiorari, will not review disputes and conflicts in the evidence. See Blue Belt Fertilizer Co. v. Pullen, 125 Fla. 164, 169 So. 615; Seven Seas, Inc., v. Buckholtz, 121 Fla. 205, 163 So. 567; Robbins Holding Co. v. Morris, 131 Fla. 205, 177 So. 404. It is contended that a departure from the essential requirements of the law occurred when the trial court gave the jury designated…
-
Wallendorf v. NEW York Life Ins. Co., 152 Fla. 574 (Fla. 1943)…the verdict has been sustained by the trial court and affirmed on appeal by the circuit court. This Court is committed to the rule that it will not review on certiorari conflicts and disputes in the testimony. See Blue Belt Fertilizer Co. v. Pullen, 125 Fla. 164, 169 So. 615; Robbins Holding Co. v. Morris, 131 Fla. 205, 179 So. 404; Metropolitan Life Ins. Co. v. Poole, 147 Fla. 686, 3 So. (2nd) 386; Farnham v. Caldwell, 141 Fla. 416, 193 So. 286. It is next contended that the trial court did not or failed…