Ditman v. C. B. Cottrell & Sons

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Ditman v. C. B. Cottrell & Sons, 125 Pa. 606 (Pa. 1889)
17 A. 504; 1889 Pa. LEXIS 757
Clark, Green, McCollum, Paxson, Williams

Ditman v. C. B. Cottrell & Sons

Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam:

The question here is whether the agreement of December 10, 1885, is a conditional sale or a bailment. The learned • court below ruled that it was a bailment, and we see no error in this. The case comes distinctly within Rowe v. Sharp, 51 Pa. 26, and Enlow v. Klein, 79 Pa. 488, and that line of cases.

Judgment affirmed.

Reference

Full Case Name
J. G. DITMAN v. C. B. COTTRELL & SONS
Cited By
13 cases
Status
Published
Syllabus
Where, on a sheriff’s interpleader, the claimants showed a written agreement between themselves and the execution defendant whereby in consideration of a fixed sum to be paid in monthly instalments, they agreed to let to hire to the latter the property levied upon, for a term of years, and in case of no default, to execute a bill of sale of the property, the agreement as to the creditors of the execution defendant was a bailment and not a conditional sale: Rowe v. Sharp, 51 Pa. 26 ; En-low v. Klein, 79 Pa. 488.