Sprague Canning MacHinery Co. v. Western Ranching Corp.
Before: Richards
Synopsis
Order for Payment of Monet—Evidence—Construction of Instrument.—In this action to recover upon a written order calling for the payment of various sums of money upon different dates,- which was drawn upon the defendant by a sales agent employed by it to make disposition of certain lands, and which was accepted by the plaintiff in payment of certain advances made by it to such agent to make such sales, it is held that, in the light of the evidence, the dates set after the several installments which were to be paid by the terms of the accepted order referred, not to the times when commissions would be due and payable to such agent from the defendant, but that they referred to the dates whereon the several sums set before them would be due and payable by the defendant to the plaintiff without respect to when or whether any particular amount of commissions was then earned or payable.
Id.—Effect of Order—Novation.—It is also held that on the date of the drawing and acceptance of the order a novation was agreed to and accomplished between the parties thereto, and that whatever contingencies there might be as to the amount of commissions then or thereafter to be chargeable to the defendant as between itself and such agent, were assumed by the defendant, and were not to affect or qualify the terms of its said acceptance or the amounts to become due the plaintiff thereon.
More from California Court of Appeal
- People v. Hill (1998)
- In Re Autumn H. (1994)
- Nwosu v. Uba (2004)
- In Re Casey D. (1999)
- Santisas v. Goodin (1998)
- Cahill v. San Diego Gas & Electric Co. (2011)
- People v. Rivera (2015)
- People v. Barnett (1998)
- People v. Serrano (2012)
- Benach v. County of Los Angeles (2007)