Tabora purchased law books from Lawyers Cooperative Publishing but failed to fully pay for them. Per the agreement, ownership remained with Lawyers Coop until full payment. The books were delivered to Tabora's office but that night his office was destroyed by fire. When Lawyers Coop sued Tabora for the balance owed, he claimed the fire constituted force majeure. However, the court held that Tabora was liable because the agreement stated that any loss or damage after delivery fell on the buyer, and ownership was retained only as security for payment, not delivery of specific books.
Tabora purchased law books from Lawyers Cooperative Publishing but failed to fully pay for them. Per the agreement, ownership remained with Lawyers Coop until full payment. The books were delivered to Tabora's office but that night his office was destroyed by fire. When Lawyers Coop sued Tabora for the balance owed, he claimed the fire constituted force majeure. However, the court held that Tabora was liable because the agreement stated that any loss or damage after delivery fell on the buyer, and ownership was retained only as security for payment, not delivery of specific books.
Tabora purchased law books from Lawyers Cooperative Publishing but failed to fully pay for them. Per the agreement, ownership remained with Lawyers Coop until full payment. The books were delivered to Tabora's office but that night his office was destroyed by fire. When Lawyers Coop sued Tabora for the balance owed, he claimed the fire constituted force majeure. However, the court held that Tabora was liable because the agreement stated that any loss or damage after delivery fell on the buyer, and ownership was retained only as security for payment, not delivery of specific books.
Tabora purchased law books from Lawyers Cooperative Publishing but failed to fully pay for them. Per the agreement, ownership remained with Lawyers Coop until full payment. The books were delivered to Tabora's office but that night his office was destroyed by fire. When Lawyers Coop sued Tabora for the balance owed, he claimed the fire constituted force majeure. However, the court held that Tabora was liable because the agreement stated that any loss or damage after delivery fell on the buyer, and ownership was retained only as security for payment, not delivery of specific books.
FACTS: Tabora purchased volumes of AmJur from Lawyers Coop. The a greement was for ownership to remain with Lawyers Coop until payment o f the full price. Loss or damage to the goods after delivery to the buyer is for the account of the latter. The books were delivered to his office; that same night, his office was razed by fire. Tabora failed to pay the full purchas e price. Now Lawyers Coop sues him for the balance. Tabora invokes force majeure. ISSUE: Who bears the loss? HELD: TABORA. While it is true that generally, loss is for the account of the ow ner, the same does not apply here because the parties themselves have expre ssly stipulated that loss, after delivery to the buyer, are for the account o f the latter. Besides, the stipulation retaining ownership to the selle r is intended merely to secure payment by the buyer. Likewise, the obligati on of Tabora consists of the delivery not a determinate thing, but a generic thing money. Thus, he is not absolved from liability.