Stoppage in transitu
Definitions from Case Law · United States Supreme Court
Definitions from Case Law
From 21 U.S. 268 - Seth Spring v. South Carolina Insurance Company · 1823Most cited · 53 citing opinions
a consignor loses his right to stop goods in transitu, although the consignee have become insolvent, after such consignee, having power to sell, has disposed of them, before their arrival, to a third person, unacquainted with any circumstance to taint the fairness of the transaction.
How often courts cite the cases defining “Stoppage in transitu”
Court decisions citing the 2 opinions that defined “Stoppage in transitu” — 72 in all, by decade. Counts are citations to the defining cases as a whole, not verified uses of the term. The dip in the most recent years is a data-coverage gap, not a real trend — our corpus holds fewer opinions from the latest years.
All 2 definitions, chronological · 1816–1823
- ORIGINAL
That right exists in the single case of insolvency, and presupposes, not only that the property has passed to the consignee, but that the possession is in a third person in the transit to the consignee. It cannot, therefore, touch a case where the actual or constructive possession still remains in the shipper or his exclusive agents.
limited to insolvency