lima5S35»5Wt)»SBtCJ5at>i>ig*t>^ ' 



Pertinent Legal Findings 



Variance in Quality of Lumber 

 - If a seller of a <)uantity of luml^r delivered material of different 

 quality, the buyer, by accepting the delivery, waived any right to 

 afterwards complain of the quality, except to claim a reduction in 

 the price to be paid. (Norwood te Maremont, Wolfson & Cohen Com- 

 pany, 182 Illinois Appellate Court Beports 78.) 

 Equitable Liens on Logs 



Plaintiff contracted to buy a quantity of logs from defendant, 

 who agreed to deliver them at a railroad station. After having the 

 logs measured and branded with her brand, plaintiff advanced $2,000 

 to defendant on the purchase prices. Held, that plaintiff acquired 

 an equitable lien upon the lotjs wiich she could enforce, to secure 

 repayment of such advances, against a third person, who afterwards 

 bought the same logs from defendant. (Kentucky Court of Appeals, 

 Kline vs. Cofield, 169 Southwestern Reporter 477). 



According to the latest available figures, Pennsylvania stands fifth 

 in the production of wood pulp and is second to West Virginia in 

 the amount of slabs and other .sawmill waste used for pulp; Maine 

 stands third. 



Duty to Safeguard Machinery 



The -decision of the Minnesota supreme court in the case of Gloekner 

 VB. the Hardwood Manufacturing Company, 122 Northwestern Reporter 

 30, sums np some of the vital rules of law which govern the liability 

 af woodworking manufacturers for injury to employes caused by 

 failure to equip dangerous machinery with safeguards. Tlicse rules 

 may be summarized as follows: 



When a .state law requires dangerous machinery to be guarded, 

 omission to. equip a jnaehine with a guard, which it was practicable to 

 apply constitutes actionable negligence, rendering the employer liable 

 for any injury resulting to a workman as a direct result of such omis- 

 sion, without further proof of any carelessness attributable to the 

 employer. But an employe, on suing for an injury received, has the 

 burden of proving not only that the machine at which the accident 

 occurred was a dangerous one, but that it was practicable to have 

 equipped it with a safeguard. "The practicability of guarding dan- 

 gerous machinery depends upon the character of the machine, its his- 

 tory, the difiSculty of attaching a guard without interfering with its 

 eflBciency, and upon all the facts and circumstances surrounding the 

 matter at and prior to the time of the accident. ' ' 

 Delivery of Lumber Sold 



When an agreement for a sale of lumber has been entered into, 

 and transportation of it by rail or vessel is involved, the question as to 

 when title passes to the buyer may become a very important one. The 

 point is usually raised when the shipment has been lost or damaged 

 in transit, but occasionally arises where a third party attempts to 

 attach the property as belonging to one of the parties. 



Clear provisions of the contract of sale are, of course, controlling on 

 this question, and the following observations are limited to cases 

 where the contract is silent as to whether delivery shall be made to the 

 buyer at the point of shipment or at the destination. 



As a general rule, title is presumed to have been intended to pass 

 to the buyer on delivery of the shipment to a railway company or 

 other carrier for transportation to him. This is specially true when 

 the buyer has designated a certain carrier to whom the shipment is to 

 be delivered. But to constitute a delivery to the buyer through a 

 delivery to a carrier, the seller must relinquish all control over the 

 lumber. The seller cannot ship the freight to his own order, and then 

 assert that delivery to the railway company was a delivery to the 

 buyer's agent. 



Prepayment of the freight charges raises an inference that the 

 seller intended to retain title pending transit, but that presumption 

 may be overcome by countervailing circumstances. 



There is an authoritative appellate court decision to uphold the 

 statement that when lumber is shipped in the name of the buyer, title 

 passes to him under the general rule above stated, although the bUl of 

 lading be not sent to him at once. 



Under a contract to deliver lumber f . o. b. cars place of loading, 



—26— 



-it was decided by the supreme court of Wisconsin that the buyer was 

 bound to pay for the quantity loaded on the cars pursuant to the 

 agreement of sale, as distinguished from the quantity which arrived 

 at the destination, since title passed to the buyer on the shipment 

 being delivered to the railway company, subject to the buyer's right 

 of inspection. 



Employer's Liability for Accident 



A woodsman engaged in trimming fallen trees is not entitled to 

 recover for injury caused by his being struck by a branch in turning 

 a tree over, although the tree may not have ieen felled in a proper 

 manner, that not having been the direct cause of the injury. (Ken- 

 tucky Court of Appeals, Dotson vs. Delorme lamiber Company, 169 

 Southwestern tBeporter 503.) 



Implied Contracts to Pay 



When it is shomi that a firm has received lumber and used it in the 

 firm btisiness, tho seller need not prove an order therefor in order to 

 recover the value thereof; acceptance and use of property implies a 

 promise to pay. (Georgia Court of Appeals, Cary vs. Simpson & 

 Harper, 82 Southeastern Reporter 918.) 



Phases of Timber Conveyances 



In the case of Baker vs. Kenney, 124 Northwestern Reporter 901, 

 the Iowa supreme court decided the following propositions of law 

 applicable to sales of standing timber: 



A sale of trees growing upon a certain tract of land, with permis- 

 sion to cut and remove tliem within a certain time, gives no interest in 

 the land itself, and hence need not be evidenced by a written instru- 

 ment. (Ed. Note. — It would seem, however, that although a contract 

 to sell standing timber does not pass such "interest in land" as is 

 required by the statutes of nearly every state to be reduced to writing, 

 the agreement does fall within the laws of the several states which 

 require contracts not to be performed within the period of one year 

 to be evidenced by a writing signed by the person to be bound 

 thereby.) 



A conveyance of all the "timber and growth of timber," on a 

 given tract of land, with the privilege of removing the same, includes 

 timber growing after the date of the deed, as well as that standing 

 at the time. 



Ordinarily a contract to sell growing trees to be removed within a 

 specified time, gives title only to such trees as are cut and removed 

 within that time, or, if no time is specified, title to such as are removed 

 within a reasonable time. But the courts will declare that a timber 

 deed gives a perpetual right to remove trees, where the language of 

 the deed clearly manifests such intention, as where an owner of land 

 conveyed to the grantee, his executors and assigns, all the timber and 

 growth of timber on certain lands, with the privilege "at all times" 

 to enter upon the land for the purpose of cutting and removing the 

 same. 



Eisk Not Assumed by Employe 



An employe of a lumber company does not assume the risk of being 

 injured or killed through fall of a pile of lumber placed upon a 

 floor which is insufliiciently underpinned, unless he knows of the de- 

 fective condition. (South Carolina Supreme Court, Anderson vs. Con- 

 way Lumber Company, 82 Southeastern Reporter 984.) 

 Letter Was Not Libelous 



Where plaintiff placed a claim for collection with sittorneys against 

 defendant on the ground of shortage in a shipment, defendant's letter 

 written the attorneys in response to a demand for payment, denying 

 that there was any shortage, and stating that it was "just a case 

 where we think Mr. Brown wanted to get an allowance of $10," was 

 not libelous. (North Carolina Supreme Court, Brown vs. Elm City 

 Lumber Company, 82 Southeastern Reporter 961.) 

 Lumber Hauler's Eight to Lien 



One who contracts to furnish teams for hauling lumber, either 

 driving the teams personally or employing drivers nt so much the thou- 

 sand feet, is not entitled to a statutory lien to secure payment of his. 

 compensation, as an "employe" or "day laborer" of a corporation 

 or partnership. 



