On or about the month of January 1907, the sheriff Jose Desiderio levied upon the property of the plaintiff by virtue of an execution issued upon a judgment secured by Macke & Chandler against Stanley &Krippendorf. The plaintiff notified the sheriff that it was the owner of the goods and forbade the sale of such under said execution. However, notwithstanding such claim, the sheriff proceeded with the sale of goods under execution. Macke & Chandler was the purchaser of said good and the same were delivered to it. The defendants allege that the property described by the plaintiff and sold at the execution sale referred to was not the property of the plaintiff at the time of said levy and sale, but was the property of Stanley &Krippendorf, who were in possession of the same at the time of such levy. The defendants also alleged that Stanley &Krippendorf, being indebted in a considerable sum to the plaintiff in this case, attempted to sell by an instrument in writing the property in question.
Whether the instrument of sale has any effect in transferring the property in question from Stanley &Krippendorf to the plaintiff.
The ownership of personal property cannot be transferred to the prejudice of third persons except by delivery of the property itself, and a sale without such delivery gives the would-be purchaser no rights in said property except those of a creditor.
A bill of sale of personal property, executed as a private document and unrecorded, the property described in said instrument not having been delivered but remaining exclusively in possession of the vendor, can have no effect against a person dealing with the property upon the faith of appearances.
Digest Credit: Joseph Eric Pocholo Briones
One thought on “KUENZLE & STREIFF, vs. MACKE & CHANDLER ET AL. G.R. No. 5295, December 16, 1909”