Ragan v. Sirigo

WOOD (Fred B.), J.

The judgment awarded plaintiff $3,100 for royalties due him pursuant to a contract dated August 8, 1941, whereby he granted defendant the right and license to manufacture and sell (with right of assignment and sublicense to others) certain patented devices claimed in a certain patent application, throughout the United States and its territories, dependencies and possessions, for the full term of any letters patent that might issue and all renewals and reissues thereof.

The contract reads as if there were two grantors, “William P. Murphy and Mike Ragan” and that the two of them owned the patent rights involved. Of the two, Ragan only, not Murphy, signed.

From these circumstances defendant would have us conclude that no contract came into existence; also, that there is a fatal defect of parties because of the failure to join Murphy or his personal representative (Murphy having died). Defendant further claims that the contract was terminated at such a time as would leave due as royalties the sum of $300 and no more. Our examination of the record convinces us that none of these claims is sound. The judgment should be affirmed.

(1)

Did the parties enter into a contract whereby plaintiff gave defendant the license described? Yes.

The trial court so found and the record supports the finding. That support is furnished largely by the conduct of the parties. For several years they treated it as a contract and recognized the obligations which it imposed upon them, respectively. It is a reasonable inference that the absence of the signature of Murphy or his personal representative was of no significance to them and that they intended and regarded it as a contract solely between themselves. (See

Cavanaugh

v.

Casselman,

88 Cal. 543, 549 [26 P. 515];

Winter

v.

Kitto,

100 Cal.App. 302, 306-308 [279 P. 1024];

John

v.

Marshall,

103 Cal.App.2d 172, 178 [229 P.2d 367]; 12 Cal.Jur.2d 247-248, §49.)