## Facts

- Jeill Enterprises (Jeill), a Korean company, agreed to sell four industrial pumps to Expert Concrete, Inc. (Expert).
- Expert paid for three pumps but could not obtain financing for the fourth pump, Pump D705011.
- Haul AS (Haul), the carrier, was to transport the pumps from Korea to New Jersey.
- Because the balance for Pump D705011 had not been paid at the time of shipment, Haul issued a separate negotiable (order) bill of lading for Pump D705011.
- Jeill kept possession of the negotiable bill of lading for Pump D705011 pending full payment.
- Haul delivered the pumps to a terminal in New Jersey, where Haul’s local representative met with Expert.
- Expert provided documents to Haul’s representative that did not include the negotiable bill of lading for Pump D705011.
- Even though Expert did not present the bill of lading for Pump D705011, Haul released all four pumps to Expert, including Pump D705011.
- Jeill later obtained a judgment in Korea against Haul based on Haul’s misdelivery of Pump D705011.
- Haul paid the Korean judgment and then obtained the negotiable bill of lading for Pump D705011 from Jeill.
- Haul sued Expert in New York seeking replevin of Pump D705011 and moved for summary judgment, asserting it held the negotiable bill of lading and, after paying Jeill’s loss, succeeded to Jeill’s rights.

## Issues

1. After paying the seller’s foreign judgment for misdelivery and acquiring the negotiable bill of lading, may the carrier assert the seller’s rights and seek replevin from the buyer who received the goods without producing the bill?
2. Does the buyer who obtained delivery without surrender of the negotiable bill of lading have a better right to possession than the holder of that bill in a replevin action?

## Decision

- The New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division addressed Haul’s attempt to recover Pump D705011 from Expert through replevin after Haul paid Jeill’s Korean judgment for misdelivery.
- The court treated Haul’s payment of Jeill’s loss and Haul’s acquisition of the negotiable bill of lading as placing Haul in Jeill’s position with respect to rights to the pump.
- The court concluded that Haul, as holder of the negotiable bill of lading and as Jeill’s successor by subrogation, could assert Jeill’s rights arising from the misdelivery and pursue replevin against Expert.
- Summary judgment was granted to Haul on its claim to recover Pump D705011.

## Legal Principles

- A negotiable bill of lading is a document of title; the right to receive the goods generally depends on proper presentment and surrender of the negotiable original.
- A carrier that releases goods covered by a negotiable bill of lading without requiring surrender of that bill may be liable for misdelivery to the party entitled under the bill.
- When a party pays a debt or loss for which another party is legally responsible, subrogation may allow the paying party to assert the paid party’s rights against the person who wrongfully obtained the benefit.
- In replevin, the plaintiff must show a right to immediate possession that is better than the defendant’s right; rights tied to a negotiable bill of lading and related subrogation can supply that possessory claim.

## Conclusion

In *Haul AS v. Expert Concrete, Inc.*, the carrier released an unpaid-for pump to the buyer without requiring surrender of the separate negotiable bill of lading, later paid the seller’s Korean judgment for misdelivery, obtained the bill from the seller, and then was permitted—standing in the seller’s place as bill holder and by subrogation—to seek replevin of the pump from the buyer in New York and obtain summary judgment.


Haul AS v. Expert Concrete, Inc., 2001 WL 1598367 (2001)